summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
-rw-r--r--.gitattributes4
-rw-r--r--LICENSE.txt11
-rw-r--r--README.md2
-rw-r--r--old/50373-0.txt13621
-rw-r--r--old/50373-0.zipbin278440 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h.zipbin3505054 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/50373-h.htm19089
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/b1.jpgbin338 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/b2.jpgbin321 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/b3.jpgbin269 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/b4.jpgbin259 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/cover.jpgbin35313 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/fr.jpgbin32279 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-007.jpgbin22922 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-021.jpgbin30755 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-026.jpgbin17143 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-027.jpgbin34025 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-029.jpgbin29742 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-030.jpgbin16511 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-035.jpgbin18598 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-047.jpgbin29961 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-048.jpgbin21918 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-051.jpgbin31342 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-064.jpgbin28082 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-065.jpgbin31342 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-072.jpgbin29956 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-079.jpgbin33444 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-080.jpgbin29792 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-085.jpgbin34586 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-086.jpgbin35599 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-090.jpgbin34928 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-095.jpgbin50750 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-096.jpgbin35608 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-110.jpgbin42059 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-113.jpgbin22029 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-114.jpgbin35265 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-119.jpgbin29276 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-120.jpgbin28611 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-123.jpgbin28593 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-124.jpgbin29252 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-127.jpgbin48018 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-128.jpgbin31036 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-134.jpgbin28040 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-135.jpgbin11308 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-141.jpgbin32634 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-142.jpgbin35263 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-151.jpgbin37131 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-152.jpgbin31817 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-159.jpgbin37030 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-160.jpgbin33817 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-169.jpgbin30427 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-170.jpgbin24222 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-175.jpgbin24979 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-184.jpgbin15687 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-185.jpgbin35304 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-193.jpgbin18795 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-194.jpgbin15972 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-208.jpgbin21149 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-209.jpgbin31808 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-221.jpgbin15102 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-227.jpgbin57482 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-228.jpgbin33383 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-233.jpgbin26684 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-253.jpgbin64118 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-263.jpgbin21883 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-273.jpgbin19533 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-278.jpgbin41933 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-279.jpgbin30642 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-287.jpgbin47006 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-288.jpgbin33532 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-297.jpgbin50651 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-298.jpgbin39198 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-305.jpgbin43359 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-309.jpgbin20657 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-315.jpgbin41429 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-323.jpgbin35480 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-333.jpgbin44758 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-347.jpgbin19019 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-351.jpgbin21094 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-361.jpgbin42612 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-375.jpgbin74995 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-376.jpgbin74211 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-400.jpgbin39665 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-403.jpgbin25633 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-404.jpgbin13706 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-411.jpgbin26332 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-412.jpgbin17569 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-429.jpgbin30565 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-439.jpgbin16844 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-454.jpgbin50067 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-457.jpgbin54936 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-467.jpgbin19206 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-478.jpgbin17180 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-479.jpgbin39436 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-489.jpgbin46568 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-490.jpgbin49460 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-495.jpgbin17744 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-496.jpgbin14264 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-504.jpgbin24250 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-505.jpgbin36342 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-511.jpgbin15917 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-519.jpgbin19642 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-524.jpgbin40889 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-527.jpgbin19524 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-533.jpgbin36476 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-541.jpgbin14513 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-548.jpgbin21930 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-549.jpgbin32701 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-567.jpgbin45911 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/ill-568.jpgbin44976 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/50373-h/images/title.jpgbin46373 -> 0 bytes
111 files changed, 17 insertions, 32710 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7b82bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+*.txt text eol=lf
+*.htm text eol=lf
+*.html text eol=lf
+*.md text eol=lf
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5d49cc5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #50373 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50373)
diff --git a/old/50373-0.txt b/old/50373-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index c0e5d3e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,13621 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg EBook of Cricket, by Horace Gordon Hutchinson
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
-almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
-re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
-with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license
-
-
-Title: Cricket
-
-Editor: Horace Gordon Hutchinson
-
-Release Date: November 3, 2015 [EBook #50373]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: UTF-8
-
-*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRICKET ***
-
-
-
-
-Produced by Giovanni Fini, MWS and the Online Distributed
-Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
-produced from images generously made available by The
-Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- CRICKET
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _R. James._
-_TOSSING FOR INNINGS._]
-
-
-
-
- CRICKET
-
- EDITED BY
-
- HORACE G. HUTCHINSON
-
- [Illustration]
-
- “_DESIPERE IN LOCO_”
-
- LONDON: PUBLISHED AT THE OFFICES
- OF “COUNTRY LIFE,” TAVISTOCK STREET,
- COVENT GARDEN, W.C. & BY GEORGE
- NEWNES, LTD. SOUTHAMPTON STREET,
- STRAND, W.C. MCMIII
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-PREFACE
-
-
-Surely it is sheer neglect of opportunity offered by an official
-position if, being an editor, one has no prefatory word to say of the
-work that one is editing. It is said that that which is good requires
-no praise, but it is a saying that is contradicted at every turn—or
-else all that is advertised must be very bad. While it is our firm
-belief that the merits of the present book—_The Country Life Cricket
-Book_—are many and various (it would be an insult to the able heads
-of the different departments into which the great subject is herein
-divided to think otherwise), we believe also that the book has one very
-special and even unique merit. We believe, and are very sure, that
-there has never before been given to the public any such collection
-of interesting old prints illustrative of England’s national game as
-appear in the present volume. It is due to the kind generosity of
-the Marylebone Cricket Club, as well as of divers private persons,
-that we are able to illustrate the book in this exceptional way; and
-we (that is to say, all who are concerned in the production) beg to
-take the opportunity of giving most cordial thanks to those who have
-given this invaluable help, and so greatly assisted in making the
-book not only attractive, but also original in its attraction. In the
-first place, the prints form in some measure a picture-history of the
-national game, from the early days when men played with the wide low
-wicket and the two stumps, down through all the years that the bat was
-developing out of a curved hockey-stick into its present shape, and
-that the use of the bat at the same time was altering from the manner
-of the man with the scythe, meeting the balls called “daisy-cutters,”
-to the straightforward upright batting of the classical examples. The
-classical examples perhaps are exhibited most ably in the pictures
-of Mr. G. F. Watts, which show us that the human form divine can be
-studied in its athletic poses equally well (save for the disadvantage
-of the draping flannels) on the English field of cricket as in the
-Greek gymnasium. The prints, too, give us a picture-history of the
-costumes of the game. There are the “anointed clod-stumpers” of
-Broadhalfpenny going in to bat with the smock, most inconvenient, we
-may think, of dresses. There are the old-fashioned fellows who were
-so hardly parted from their top-hats. These heroes of a bygone age
-are also conspicuous in braces. We get a powerful hint, too, from the
-pictures, of the varying estimation in which the game has been held
-at different times. There is a suggestion of reverence in some of the
-illustrations—a sense that the artist knew himself to be handling a
-great theme. In others we see with pain that the treatment is almost
-comic, certainly frivolous. We hardly can suppose that the picture of
-the ladies’ cricket match would encourage others of the sex to engage
-in the noble game, although “Miss Wicket” of the famous painting has
-a rather attractive although pensive air—she has all the aspect of
-having got out for a duck’s egg.
-
-More decidedly to the same effect—of its differing hold on popular
-favour—do we get a hint from the spectators assembled (but assembled
-is too big a word for their little number) to view the game. “Lord’s”
-on an Australian match day, or a Gents _v._ Players, or Oxford and
-Cambridge, hardly would be recognised by one of the old-time heroes, if
-we could call him up again across the Styx to take a second innings. He
-would wonder what all the people had come to look at. He hardly would
-believe that they were come to see the game he used to play to a very
-meagre gallery in his life. But he would be pleased to observe the
-progress of the world—how appreciative it grew of what was best in it
-as it grew older.
-
-Another thing that the collection illustrates is the various changes
-of site of the headquarters of the game, if it had a headquarters
-before it settled down to its present place of honour in St. John’s
-Wood. There is a picture (_vide_ p. v) of “Thomas Lord’s first
-Cricket Ground, Dorset Square, Marylebone. Match played June 20,
-1793, between the Earls of Winchilsea and Darnley for 1000 guineas.”
-With regard to this interesting picture, Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane,
-in his catalogue of the pictures, drawings, etc., in possession of
-the Marylebone Cricket Club, has a note as follows:—“This match was
-Kent (Lord Darnley’s side) _v._ Marylebone, with Walker, Beldham, and
-Wills (Lord Winchilsea’s side). M.C.C. won by ten wickets. It will be
-noticed that only two stumps are represented as being used, whereas,
-according to _Scores and Biographies_, it is known that as far back as
-1775 a third stump had been introduced; many representations, however,
-of the game at a later date show only two stumps.” No doubt at this
-early period there was no very fully acknowledged central authority,
-and such little details as these were much a matter of local option.
-The wicket shown in this picture does not seem to differ at all from
-the wicket in the picture of “Cricket” by F. Hayman, R.A. (_vide_ p.
-1), in the possession of the Marylebone Club, though the date of the
-latter is as early as 1743. Neither does the bat appear to have made
-much evolution in the interval. It is on the authority of Sir Spencer
-Ponsonby-Fane, in the catalogue above quoted, that we can give “about
-1750” for the date of the picture named “A Match in Battersea Fields”
-(_vide_ p. 3), in which St. Paul’s dome appears in the background.
-Here they seem to be playing with the three stumps, early as the date
-is. Again, in the fine picture, “painted for David Garrick” by Richard
-Wilson, of “Cricket at Hampton Wick” (_vide_ p. 375), three stumps
-are in use, and the bat has become much squared and straightened. Of
-course the pictures obviously fall into two chief classes—one in which
-“the play’s the thing”; the cricket is the object of the artist’s
-representation; the other in which the cricket is only used as an
-incidental feature in the foreground, to enliven a scene of which the
-serious interest is in the background or surroundings. But the pictures
-in which the cricket is the main, if not the only, interest are very
-much more numerous. A quaintly suggestive picture enough is that
-described in Sir S. Ponsonby-Fane’s catalogue as, “Situation of H.M.’s
-Ships _Fury_ and _Hecla_ at Igloolie. Sailors playing Cricket on the
-Ice.” In this, of course, there is no historical interest about the
-cricket (_vide_ p. 392). The one-legged and one-armed cricketers make
-a picture that is curious, though not very pleasant to contemplate;
-and the same is to be said of the rather vulgar representation of the
-ladies’ cricket match noticed above. The “Ticket to see a Cricket
-Match” (_vide_ p. 40) shows a bat of the most inordinate, and probably
-quite impossible, length; but we may easily suppose that the artist,
-consciously or unwittingly, has exaggerated the weapon of his day.
-Here too are two stumps only. We may notice the price of the ticket as
-somewhat remarkably high, 2s. 6d.; but it was in the days when matches
-were played for large sums of money, so perhaps all was in proportion
-(length of bat excepted, be it understood). There is a picture of the
-“celebrated Cricket Field near White Conduit House, 1787” (_vide_ p.
-17), which is named a “Representation of the Noble Game of Cricket.”
-It is a picture of some merit, and evidently careful execution, and
-here too the players are seen with bats of a prodigious length; so it
-may be that these huge weapons came into fashion for a while, only
-to be abandoned again when their uselessness was proved, or perhaps
-when the legislature began to make exact provision with regard to the
-implements used. In this same picture of the “Noble Game of Cricket” a
-man may be seen standing at deep square leg, who is apparently scoring
-the “notches,” or “notching” the runs, on a piece of stick. This at
-least appears to be his occupation, and it is interesting to observe
-it at this comparatively late date, and at headquarters. In the match
-between the sides led by Lord Winchilsea and Lord Darnley respectively,
-it is seen that there are two tail-coated gentlemen sitting on a
-bench, and probably scoring on paper, for it is hardly likely that
-they can have been reporting for the press at that time. England did
-not then demand the news of the fall of each wicket, as it does now.
-Nevertheless, that there must have been a good deal of enthusiasm for
-the game, even at a pretty early date, is shown conclusively enough by
-the engraving (_vide_ p. 190) of the “North-East View of the Cricket
-Grounds at Darnall, near Sheffield, Yorkshire.” What the precise date
-of this picture may be I do not know, but it is evident that it must
-be old, from the costumes of the players, who are in knee-breeches and
-the hideous kind of caps that have been reintroduced with the coming
-of the motor-car. Also the umpires, with their top-hatted heads and
-tightly-breeched lower limbs, show that this picture is not modern.
-And yet the concourse of spectators is immense. Even allowing for some
-pardonable exaggeration on the part of the artist, it is certain that
-many people must have been in the habit of looking on at matches,
-otherwise this picture would be absurd; and this, be it observed, was
-not in the southern counties, which we have been led to look on as
-the nurseries of cricket, but away from all southern influence, far
-from headquarters, in Yorkshire, near Sheffield. To be sure, it may
-have been within the wide sphere of influence of the great Squire
-Osbaldeston, but even so the picture is suggestive. The scorers are
-here seated at a regular table. A very curious representation of the
-game is that given in the picture by James Pollard, named “A Match on
-the Heath” (_vide_ p. 29). It is a good picture. What is curious is
-that, though the period at which Pollard was producing his work was
-from 1821 to 1846, the bats used in the game are shown as slightly
-curved, and, more notably, the wicket is still of the two stumps only.
-There are only two alternative ways of accounting for this: either they
-still played in certain places with the two-stump wicket, or else,
-which is not likely, Pollard was very careless, and no cricketer, and
-took his cricket apparatus from some older picture. I observe, by the
-way, that I have, on the whole, done less than justice to the ladies,
-as they are portrayed playing the game, for though it is true that the
-one picture is, as noticed, vulgar enough, there is another, “An Eleven
-of Miss Wickets” (_vide_ p. 248), that is pretty and graceful. While
-some of the pictures in this collection are interesting mainly for
-their curiosity, or as being something like an illustrated history or
-diary of events and changes in the game, there are others that are real
-works of art and beauty, sometimes depending mainly on their expression
-of the game itself, and sometimes only using it as an adjunct to
-the scenery. Of the former kind, we must notice most especially the
-remarkable series of drawings by Mr. G. F. Watts, R.A., which show the
-batsman in the various positions of defence or attack. To very many it
-will be a revelation that the great artist could lend his pencil to
-a matter of such trivial importance (as some base souls may deem it)
-as the game of cricket; but without a doubt that great knowledge of
-anatomy, which has been one of the strong points in all his paintings,
-has been learned in some measure from these studies, which also give
-it a very high degree of expression. There is a force, a vigour, a
-meaning about these sketches which are interesting enough, if for no
-other reason than because they show so vividly the inadequacy of the
-mechanical efforts of photography, when brought into competition, as
-a means of expression, with the pencil of a really great artist. You
-feel almost as if you must jump aside out of the way of the fellow
-stepping forward to drive the leg volley, or of the fearful man drawn
-back to cut, so forcefully is the force expressed with which the
-batsman is inevitably going to hit the ball (_vide_ p. 67). One of the
-most charming pictures of those who have taken cricket for their theme
-is that which is lent by His Majesty the King to the M.C.C., and is
-styled “A Village Match.” It is by Louis Belanger, of date 1768 (_vide_
-p. 361). Charming, too, is the picture attributed to Gainsborough,
-“Portrait of a Youth with a Cricket-bat”; it is said to be a portrait
-of George IV. as a boy, but it seems doubtful. The bat here is curved,
-but hardly perceptibly; it shows the last stage in evolution before the
-straight bat was reached (_vide_ p. 208). Our frontispiece is a jolly
-scene—the ragged boys tossing the bat for innings—“Flat or Round?”
-and the fellow in the background heaping up the coats for a wicket. We
-all of us have played and loved that kind of cricket. A wonderfully
-good and detailed picture is that of “Kent _v._ Sussex” (_vide_ p.
-137). It is a picture of a match in progress on the Brighton ground,
-and Brighton is seen in the background; in the foreground is a group of
-celebrated cricketers in the spectators’ ring, yet posed, in a way that
-gives a look of artificiality to the whole scene, so as to show their
-faces to the artist. Even old Lillywhite, bowling, is turning his head
-quaintly, to show his features. One of the most conspicuous figures is
-the great Alfred Mynn, who was to a former generation what W. G. Grace
-has been to ours. All the figures are portraits, and every accessory to
-the scene is worked out most carefully. The drawing is by W. H. Mason.
-Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane has a note on this picture: “As a matter of
-fact, this match, as here represented, did not take place, the men
-shown in the engraving never having played together in such a match,
-but they all played for their respective counties about 1839-1841.”
-Very delightful, too, is the picture that is the last in our book (p.
-433), “At the End of the Innings”—an old veteran with eye still keen,
-and firm mouth, telling of a determination to keep his wicket up and
-the ball down “as well as he knows how,” and with an interest in the
-game of his youth unabated by years. A jolly painting is that of “Old
-Charlton Church and Manor House” (_vide_ p. 415), with the coach and
-four darting past, and the boys at cricket on the village green. And
-last, but to many of us greatest of all, there is the portrait of Dr.
-W. G. Grace, from Mr. A. Stuart Wortley’s picture, which sums up a
-modern ideal of cricket that we have not yet found ourselves able to
-get past (_vide_ p. 228).
-
-There are other pictures, not a few, that we might select for notice,
-but already this ramble goes beyond due prefatory limits. There are the
-sketches in which the cricket is made to point or illustrate political
-satires. To do full justice to these, one would need to be well versed
-in the history (other than the cricketing history) of the period. But
-enough has been said. One could not let such a gallery of old masters
-go without an attempt to do the showman for them in some feeble way.
-They need neither help nor apology. They are good enough to win off
-their own bat.
-
-In our modern instances we have been no less lucky: with Mr. Warner
-to bat, Mr. Jephson to bowl, Mr. Jessop to field, and the rest of the
-good company, we do not know that any other choice could have made our
-eleven better than it is; but after all, that is for the public to say;
-it is from the pavilion, not the players, that the applause should
-come.
-
-
-
-
-CONTENTS
-
-
- CHAP. PAGE
-
- 1. SOME POINTS IN CRICKET HISTORY 1
-
- 2. EARLY DEVELOPMENTS OF THE CRICKETING ART 29
-
- 3. BATTING 48
-
- 4. BOWLING 79
-
- 5. FIELDING 117
-
- 6. COUNTY CRICKET 137
-
- 7. AMATEURS AND PROFESSIONALS 193
-
- 8. EARLIER AUSTRALIAN CRICKET 217
-
- 9. ENGLISH AND AUSTRALIAN CRICKET FROM 1894 TO 1902 251
-
- 10. UNIVERSITY CRICKET 296
-
- 11. COUNTRY-HOUSE CRICKET 342
-
- 12. VILLAGE CRICKET 361
-
- 13. FOREIGN CRICKET 381
-
- 14. CRICKET IN SOUTH AFRICA 396
-
- 15. CRICKET IN NEW ZEALAND 409
-
- 16. CRICKET GROUNDS 415
-
- INDEX 443
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
-
-
- Tossing for Innings _Frontispiece_
-
- Cricket as played in the Artillery Ground, London,
- in 1743 _To face page_ 1
-
- The Royal Academy Club in Marylebone Fields ” ” 2
-
- A Match in Battersea Fields ” ” 3
-
- An Exact Representation of the Game of Cricket ” ” 6
-
- The Game of Cricket ” ” 16
-
- The Cricket Field near White Conduit House ” ” 17
-
- The Noble Game of Cricket ” ” 18
-
- A Match on the Heath ” ” 29
-
- “Cricket.” After the painting in Vauxhall Garden ” ” 36
-
- A Ticket for a Cricket Match in 1744 ” ” 40
-
- William and Thomas Earle ” ” 41
-
- Mr. James Henry Dark ” ” 44
-
- Mr. Thos. Hunt ” ” 45
-
- “Block or Play” ” ” 52
-
- “Forward Play” ” ” 53
-
- The Draw or Pull ” ” 65
-
- The Leg Volley ” ” 66
-
- The Cut ” ” 67
-
- Eighteenth-Century Bats ” ” 70
-
- Celebrated Bats ” ” 71
-
- War-worn Weapons ” ” 72
-
- Relics of Past Engagements ” ” 73
-
- George Parr ” ” 74
-
- N. Felix ” ” 75
-
- The Bowler (Alfred Mynn) ” ” 79
-
- William Lillywhite ” ” 84
-
- John Wisden ” ” 85
-
- Alfred Mynn ” ” 92
-
- James Cobbett ” ” 93
-
- William Lillywhite ” ” 98
-
- William Clarke, etc. ” ” 99
-
- Lord’s Ground early in the Nineteenth Century ” ” 106
-
- One Arm and One Leg Match ” ” 107
-
- A Match at the Gentlemen’s Club, White Conduit
- House, Islington ” ” 110
-
- The Kennington Oval in 1849 ” ” 117
-
- The Cricket Field at Rugby ” ” 124
-
- A Match in the Eighties ” ” 125
-
- Kent _v._ Sussex at Brighton ” ” 137
-
- A Cricket Match (about 1756) ” ” 148
-
- A Curious County Club Advertisement ” ” 152
-
- Grand Female Cricket Match ” ” 153
-
- The Batsman (Fuller Pilch) ” ” 156
-
- An Old “Play” Bill ” ” 174
-
- Rural Sports ” ” 182
-
- The Cricket Ground at Darnall, near Sheffield ” ” 190
-
- The Earl of March ” ” 193
-
- Mr. J. H. Dark, Hillyer, The Umpire Martingell ” ” 200
-
- Fuller Pilch ” ” 201
-
- Portrait of a Youth ” ” 208
-
- William Doorinton ” ” 209
-
- George Parr ” ” 214
-
- Thomas Box ” ” 222
-
- Dr. W. G. Grace ” ” 228
-
- Youth with a Cricket Bat ” ” 236
-
- An Eleven of Miss Wickets ” ” 248
-
- The Honourable Spencer Ponsonby ” ” 260
-
- A Cricket Song ” ” 272
-
- A Lyric of the Cricket Field ” ” 273
-
- Salvadore House, Tooting, Surrey ” ” 298
-
- Cricket Ground, Todmorden ” ” 299
-
- Cricket at Rugby in 1837 ” ” 304
-
- Cambridge University Students playing Cricket, 1842 ” ” 305
-
- The Corinthians at Lord’s in 1822 ” ” 320
-
- A Match in 1805 ” ” 328
-
- Miss Wicket and Miss Trigger ” ” 344
-
- A Country-House Cricket Match ” ” 352
-
- A Village Match in 1768 ” ” 361
-
- “‘Out,’ so don’t fatigue yourself, I beg, Sir!” ” ” 370
-
- A Cricketer ” ” 371
-
- Village Cricket in 1832 ” ” 374
-
- Cricket at Hampton Wick ” ” 375
-
- An Eighteenth-Century Caricature ” ” 381
-
- A Parliamentary Match ” ” 386
-
- A Match at Igloolie between H.M. Ships _Fury_ and
- _Hecla_ ” ” 392
-
- A State Match ” ” 398
-
- The Soldier’s Widow or Schoolboys’ Collection ” ” 402
-
- Old Charlton Church and Manor House ” ” 415
-
- Cricket’s Peaceful Weapons ” ” 432
-
- At the End of the Innings (William Beldham) ” ” 433
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _Francis Hayman, R.A._
-_CRICKET, AS PLAYED IN THE ARTILLERY GROUND, LONDON, IN 1743._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER I
-
-SOME POINTS IN CRICKET HISTORY
-
-By THE EDITOR
-
-
-Cricket began when first a man-monkey, instead of catching a cocoanut
-thrown him playfully by a fellow-anthropoid, hit it away from him
-with a stick which he chanced to be holding in his hand. But the date
-of this occurrence is not easy to ascertain, and therefore it is
-impossible to fix the date of the invention of cricket. For cricket
-has passed through so many stages of evolution before arriving at the
-phase in which we find it to-day that it is difficult to say when the
-name, as we understand its meaning, first became rightly applicable
-to it. The first use of the name “cricket” for any game is indeed a
-matter entirely of conjecture. It is not known precisely by Skeat,
-nor Strutt, nor Mr. Andrew Lang. But whether the name was applied by
-reason of the cricket or crooked stick, which was the early form of
-the bat, or whether from the cross stick used as a primitive bail, or
-from the cricket or stool, at which the bowler aimed the ball, really
-does not very much matter, for all these etymological vanities belong
-rather to the mythological age of cricket than the historical. Neither
-is it of great importance whether cricket was originally played under
-another name, such as club-ball, as Mr. Pycroft infers, on rather
-meagre authority, as it seems to me, from Nyren. Nyren did not hazard
-the inference. The fact is that the form in which we first find cricket
-played, and called cricket, is quite unlike our cricket of to-day, so
-that we do not need to go seeking anything by a different name. They
-played with two upright stumps, 1 foot high, 2 feet apart, with a cross
-stump over them and a hole dug beneath this cross stump. The cross
-stump is evidently the origin of our bails. Nyren does not believe in
-this kind of cricket, but he gives no reason for his disbelief, for the
-excellent reason that he can have had no reason for his scepticism; and
-the fact is proved by the evidence of old pictures. He was a simple,
-good man; he never saw anything like cricket played in that way, so he
-did not believe any one else ever had. He did not perhaps understand
-much about the law of evidence, but he wrote delightfully about
-cricket. The fourth edition of his guide, which a friend’s kindness
-has privileged me to see, is dated 1847, some time after the author’s
-death.
-
-[Illustration:
- _Engraved from a Painting by_ _Francis Hayman, R.A._
-_THE ROYAL ACADEMY CLUB IN MARYLEBONE FIELDS._]
-
-[Illustration: _A MATCH IN BATTERSEA FIELDS._]
-
-Yes, in spite of Nyren, they bowled at this cross-stick and wicket
-which the ball could pass through again and again without removing
-the cross piece, and the recognised way of getting a man out was not
-so much to bowl him as to catch or run him out. You ran him out by
-getting the ball into the hole between the stumps before he got his bat
-there—making the game something like rounders. Fingers got such nasty
-knocks encountering the bat in a race for this hole that bails and a
-popping crease were substituted—at least the humane consideration is
-stated to have been a factor in the change.
-
-It is not to be supposed that even we, for all our legislation, have
-witnessed the final evolution of cricket. Legislate we never so often,
-something will always remain to be bettered—the width of the wicket
-or the law of the follow on. About the earliest records that have come
-down to us there is a notable incompleteness that we must certainly
-regret. The bowler gets no credit for wickets caught or stumped off
-his bowling. What would become of the analysis of the underhand bowler
-of to-day if wickets caught and stumped were not credited to him? But
-at the date of these early records all the bowling was of necessity
-underhand. Judge then of the degree in which those poor bowlers have
-been defrauded of their just rights. Whether or no the name of our
-great national game was derived from the “cricket” in the sense of
-the crooked stick used for defence of the wicket, it is certain, from
-the evidence of old pictures, if from nothing else, that crooked
-sticks, like the modern hockey sticks, filled, as best they might,
-the function of the bat. They are figured as long and narrow, with
-a curving lower end. There was no question in those days of the bat
-passing the four-inch gauge. They must have been very inferior, as
-weapons of defence for the wicket, to our modern bats—broomsticks
-rather than bats—more than excusing, when taken in connection with the
-rough ground, the smallness of the scores, even though the bowling was
-all underhand and, practically, there was no defence. The solution of
-these problems, however, is, I fear, buried in the mists of antiquity,
-and one scarcely dares even to hope for a solution of them, or the
-fixing of the date of the changes. There are other problems that do not
-seem as if they ought to be so hopelessly beyond our ken. In Nyren’s
-cricketer’s guide, one of the laws of cricket, therein quoted, provides
-that the wickets shall be pitched by the umpires, yet in part of his
-time, if not all of it—and when the change was made I cannot find
-out—it must have been the custom for the bowler to choose the pitch,
-for he records special praise of the chief bowler of the old Hambledon
-Club, that on choosing a wicket he would be guided not only by the kind
-of ground that would help him individually best, but also would take
-pains to see that the bowler from the other end had a nice bumping knob
-to pitch the ball on—for by this time “length” bowling, as it was
-called, had come into general use. Nyren’s words are that he “has with
-pleasure noticed the pains he—Harris—has taken in choosing the ground
-for his fellow-bowler as well as himself.”
-
-In 1774 there was a meeting, under the presidency of Sir William
-Draper, supported by the Duke of Dorset, the Earl of Tankerville, Sir
-Horace Mann, and other influential supporters of cricket, to draw up
-laws for the game, and therein it is stated that the “pitching of ye
-first wicket is to be determined by ye cast of a piece of money,” but
-it does not then say by whom they are to be pitched, nor does this
-function come within the province of the umpires as therein defined.
-This, therefore, is the first problem which I would ask the help of
-all cricketing readers towards solving—the date at which the pitching
-of the stumps ceased to be the business or privilege of the bowler. It
-was the introduction of “length” bowling, no doubt—previously it was
-all along the ground—real bowling as in bowls—that forced them to
-straighten the bats. Mr. Ward, in some memoranda which he gave Nyren,
-and which the latter quoted at large, says of these bats, used in a
-match that arose from a challenge on behalf of Kent County, issued by
-Lord John Sackville, to play All England in 1847: “The batting could
-neither have been of a high character, nor indeed safe, as may be
-gathered from the figure of the bat at that time, which was similar to
-an old-fashioned dinner-knife curved at back and sweeping in the form
-of a volute at the front and end. With such a bat the system must have
-been all for hitting; it would be barely possible to block, and when
-the practice of bowling length balls was introduced, and which (_sic_)
-gave the bowler so great an advantage in the game, it became absolutely
-necessary to change the form of the bat in order that the striker
-might be able to keep pace with the improvement. It was therefore made
-straight in the pod, in consequence of which, a total revolution, it
-may be said a reformation too, ensued in the style of play.”
-
-Then follows a record of the score of the match, which need not be
-detailed. England made 40 and 70, and Kent 53 and 58 for nine wickets,
-a gallant win. “Some years after this,” Mr. Ward continues—it is to
-be presumed Nyren quotes the _ipsissima verba_, for whenever he wants
-to put in anything off his own bat it appears above his initials in a
-note—“the fashion of the bat having been changed to a straight form,
-the system of blocking was adopted”—that is to say, some years after
-1740.
-
-The date is vague. Let us say early in the second half of the
-eighteenth century, and I think we may go so far as to say that
-cricket, as we understand it, began then too. It can hardly have been
-cricket—this entirely aggressive batting. The next date of importance
-as marking an epoch, if we may speak of the next when we have left
-the last so much to conjecture, is 1775. On 22nd of May of that year
-there was a great match “in the Artillery Ground between five of the
-Hambledon Club and five of All England, when Small went in, the last
-man, for fourteen runs and fetched them. Lumpy”—a very famous bowler
-baptized Edward, surnamed Stevens—“was bowler upon the occasion, and
-it having been remarked that his balls had three times passed between
-Small’s stumps, it was considered to be a hard thing upon the bowler
-that his straightest ball should be so sacrificed; the number of the
-stumps was in consequence increased from two to three.”
-
-[Illustration:
- _Engraved in 1743 by H. Roberts._ _After L. P. Boitard._
-_AN EXACT REPRESENTATION OF THE GAME OF CRICKET._]
-
-That is plain enough, but what is not plain is the height of the stumps
-at that time.
-
-Mr. Pycroft puts the height of the stumps at 1 foot, with a width
-of only 6 inches, up to 1780, and it is evident from what Nyren
-says—(_a_) that he had never seen stumps of 1 foot high and 2 feet
-wide; and (_b_) that they were not of 22 inches high until 1775.
-Therefore here is evidence in support of Mr. Pycroft’s 1 foot high and
-6 inch wide wicket, to say nothing of the unimpeachable value of his
-own statements. But he himself adduces nothing that I can find in its
-support, nor does he attempt to give us the date of the first narrowing
-of the stumps; and with regard to the alteration from two low stumps to
-three 22-inch stumps I am obliged to find him at variance with Nyren.
-
-The point, therefore, that I want to light on is the date and
-circumstances of the change from wickets of two stumps 1 foot high and
-2 feet apart, to wickets of two stumps 1 foot high, and only 6 inches
-apart. This very drastic change appears to have been accomplished
-without a word of historical comment upon it. There was a deal of
-discussion at the time of the introduction of the third stump about the
-probable effect on the game of this change, some arguing that it would
-shorten the game—that every one would get out quickly.
-
-Mr. Ward took the opposite view, that it would lead to more careful
-and improved batting, and cites a remarkable match played in 1777
-between the Hambledon Club and All England, in which, despite the third
-stump, England made 100 and 69; and Hambledon, in a single innings,
-made the wonderful score of 403. Aylward, who seems to have gone in
-eighth wicket down, scored 167, individually, notwithstanding that he
-had the mighty “Lumpy” against him.
-
-Mr. Ward’s memoranda therefore give us some interesting facts.
-
-So far as we can see back, the distance between the wickets has always
-been 22 yards, but up to about some time in the first half of the
-eighteenth century the wicket consisted of two stumps 1 foot high, 2
-feet apart, with a cross stump, and a hole between them.
-
-Later, this was changed for two stumps, first of 1 foot and then of 22
-inches high, 6 inches apart, with a bail and a popping crease.
-
-About 1750 “length” bowling was introduced, superseding the
-all-along-the-ground business, and nearly concurrently the bats
-straightened instead of curved. And I think we can scarcely say
-“cricket” began before that, whatever “club-ball” or “stool-ball” may
-have done.
-
-In 1775 a third stump was added.
-
-This last date, I know, does not agree with Mr. Pycroft, but I cannot
-quite make out what his original sources are. He writes: “From an MS.
-my friend”—he has mentioned so many friends in the previous paragraph
-that it is impossible to identify the one he means—“received from
-the late Mr. William Ward, it appears that the wickets were placed 22
-yards apart as long since as the year 1700. We are informed also that
-putting down the wickets, to make a man out in running, instead of the
-old custom of popping the ball into the hole, was adopted on account
-of severe injuries to the hands, and that the wicket was changed at
-the same time—1779-80—to the dimensions of 22 inches by 6, with a
-third stump added.” So, on the authority of the “MS. received by his
-friend”—it may have been the very memoranda given to Nyren, for Mr.
-Pycroft has mentioned Nyren in the preceding paragraph—Pycroft cites
-Ward as lumping together the double change from the two low stumps to
-the three higher stumps in 1779-80, whereas, in his memoranda to Nyren,
-Mr. Ward distinctly names 1775 as the date at which the third stump was
-added.
-
-Curiously enough, Pycroft must have known all about this, really, but
-it slipped his memory, for, a page or two further, we find him quoting
-almost Nyren’s or Ward’s words: “In a match of the Hambledon Club in
-1775, it was observed, at a critical point in the game, that the ball
-passed three times between Mr. Small’s two stumps without knocking off
-the bail, and then, first a third stump was added, and seeing that the
-new style of balls which rise over the bat rose also over the wickets,
-_then but 1 foot high_, the wicket was altered to the dimensions of 22
-inches by 8, and again, to its present dimensions of 27 inches by 8
-in 1817.” Though I find all up to that point in Nyren, I do not find
-the italicised words, but I have no doubt they present the fact quite
-accurately. They tell us nothing, however, as to the date at which the
-wicket was first narrowed.
-
-Another curious piece of information Mr. Ward gives us, by the way.
-“Several years since—I do not recollect the precise date—a player
-named White, of Ryegate, brought a bat to a match which, being the
-width of the stumps, effectually defended his wicket from the bowler,
-and in consequence a law was passed limiting the future width of the
-bat to 4-1/4 inches. Another law also decreed that the ball should not
-weigh less than 5-1/2 oz. or more than 5-3/4 oz.” Nyren appends a note
-to this: “I have a perfect recollection of this occurrence, also that
-subsequently an iron frame, of the statute width, was constructed for,
-and kept by, the Hambledon Club, through which any bat of suspected
-dimensions was passed, and allowed or rejected accordingly.” “Several
-years since,” says Mr. Ward, or Nyren, writing, as I presume, about the
-year 1833, so that perhaps we may put this invention of the gauge about
-1830, or a little earlier. I wonder who has this iron gauge now. Has it
-been sold up for old iron?
-
-That is a third very practical problem that one would like answered.
-
-And is it not curious to see how the rules were made and modified to
-meet the occasions as they arose. The misfortune of that
-
- Honest Lumpy who did ‘low,
- He ne’er could bowl but o’er a brow—
-
-in bowling so many times between the stumps of the too greatly blessed
-Small—whence the introduction of the third stump. And White with
-his barn-door bat, from “Ryegate,” as it pleases them to spell it,
-compelling the use of the gauge.
-
-We are too apt to think of the laws as “struck off at one time,” like
-the American Constitution, instead of regarding them as something of
-slow growth in the past, that will have to grow, with our growth, in
-the future. We shall get into trouble if we regard them as something
-too sacred to touch and do not legislate as occasion arises.
-
-We have altered them greatly since that meeting at the Star and Garter
-in Pall Mall in 1774, when they seem first to have been committed to
-writing, and by the end of the twentieth century it is likely that we
-shall have modified them considerably from this present form. We have
-a notion that our forefathers played the game in such a sportsmanlike
-manner, taking no possible advantage but such as was perfectly open
-and above-board, that they required scarcely any rules to guide them,
-but some sad things that the stern historian has to notice about the
-influence that betting had at one time on cricket—this, and also a
-sentence or two from these very memoranda of Mr. Ward, whom Nyren
-extols as the mirror of all cricketing chivalry—may show us, I think,
-that our cricketing forefathers had something human in them too. How
-is this for a piece of artful advice? “If you bring forward a fast
-bowler as a change, contrive, if fortune so favours you, that he shall
-bowl his first ball _when a cloud is passing over_, because, as this
-trifling circumstance frequently affects the sight of the striker,
-you may thereby stand a good chance of getting him out.” And again,
-a little lower on the same page: “Endeavour, by every means in your
-power—such as, by changing the bowling, by little alterations in the
-field, or by any excuse you can invent—to delay the time, that the
-strikers may become cold or inactive.”
-
-A very cunning cricketer, this Mr. Ward.
-
-Previously he had said: “If two players are well in, and warm with
-getting runs fast, and one should happen to be put out, supply his
-place immediately, lest the other become cold and stiff.” Now just
-compare these two last suggestions with each other, you will say, I
-think, that the last is fair and just and proper counsel, instilling a
-precaution that you have every right to take, but the former, according
-to the modern sense of what is right and sportsmanlike, seems to me to
-be counselling something perilously near the verge of sharp practice.
-You send your man out quickly, that the other may not grow cold,
-and what happens? Your purpose is defeated by the bowler and field
-purposely dawdling in order that the man _may_ grow cold. It does not
-strike one as quite, quite right, though no doubt it is not against the
-rules. But it is tricky, a little tricky. And so again we draw a date,
-without his suspecting it, of a new moral epoch, from our invaluable
-Mr. Ward. About 1833, or a little later, we grew a trifle more delicate
-and particular in some small points of cricketing behaviour and
-sportsmanlike dealing. The betting, and the like evil practices at one
-time connected with the game, were a grosser scandal which carried
-their own destruction with them.
-
-If any man, therefore, can throw light on these three dark points, I
-shall be very grateful to him—the date at which the first high wicket
-was narrowed down to 6 inches, the date at which the bowler ceased
-to have the pitching of the wicket, and the present habitation of
-that famous piece of old iron, the gauge used on the barn-door bat of
-White of Ryegate. Nyren, the matchless historian of the game, reveals
-himself, in his little history, as a very estimable man, of some
-matchless qualities for his task—an unbounded love of his subject and
-a sweet nature perfectly free of the slightest taint of jealousy. He
-writes of no other cricketing societies, except incidentally, than of
-those men of Hambledon in Hampshire. _Quorum pars magna fui_, as he
-says, with a single explosion of very proper pride, and a note appended
-thereto explaining apologetically that he has some certain knowledge
-of Latin. But after this single expression, very fully justified, for
-he was the beloved father of the Hambledon Club for years, he speaks
-of himself again hardly at all, just as if he had no hand in its
-successes, preferring to find some generous word to say of all the
-rest—of Beldham, Harris, Aylward, Lumpy. Beldham was not nearly so
-handsome to him, speaking of him to Mr. Pycroft. “Old Nyren was not
-half a player as we reckon now,” was Beldham’s verdict. However, the
-old man was fifty then.
-
-At least he was a very good type of an Englishman and cricketer,
-whatever his class as a player, or he could never have written that
-book. And how much Hambledon may have owed to Nyren we can never know.
-As it is, Hambledon has the credit that Nyren specially claims for
-it of being the _Attica_, the centre of early civilisation, of the
-cricketing world. But there may have been other Atticas—only, like the
-brave men before Agamemnon, unsung, for want of their Homeric Nyrens.
-
-The fact of the matter is, we know little but gossip of how the cricket
-world went before the year 1786, when Bentley takes up the running and
-records the scores. A sad fire occurred in the M.C.C. Pavilion—at
-that time the Club played where the Regent’s canal now runs, after
-being built out of Dorset Square—and burnt all the old score
-books—irreparable loss.
-
-Mr. Pycroft made an excursion into the home of the Beldhams, and
-brought out much valuable gossip, along with the unhandsome criticism
-on Nyren. “In those days,” says Beldham—1780, when Mr. Beldham was a
-boy—“the Hambledon Club could beat all England, but our three parishes
-around Farnham at last beat Hambledon.”
-
-“It is quite evident,” adds Mr. Pycroft to this, “that Farnham was the
-cradle of cricket.”
-
-Something that Beldham and others may have said to Mr. Pycroft may have
-made this fact “quite evident” to him, but I cannot see that he has
-transmitted any such evidence to us. This much, however, I think we may
-say with confidence, that all that was best of cricketing tradition
-and practice _in the south of England_—that is to say, as far as was
-in touch at all with its influences—clustered in the little corner of
-Surrey in which the parish of Farnham is. But that is not to say that
-there were not other nuclei of cricket in the north and elsewhere, and
-I think there is evidence to lead us to think there were other centres,
-perhaps less energetic.
-
-The “county” boundaries were not so rigid in those days. “You find
-us regularly,” says Beldham to Mr. Pycroft—“us” being Farnham and
-thereabouts—“on the Hampshire side in Bentley’s book,” and it is quite
-true.
-
-Then, from this little nucleus, cricket in the south extended. Beldham
-had a poor opinion of the cricket of Kent at first. Crawte, one of the
-best Kent men, was “stolen away from us,” in Beldham’s words. Aylward,
-the hero of the 167 runs, was taken, also to Kent, by Sir Horace Mann,
-as his bailiff, but “the best bat made but a poor bailiff, we heard.”
-Sussex was a cricketing county from an early date, but Beldham had a
-poor opinion of its powers likewise.
-
-The elements of the nucleus formed round Farnham were disseminated,
-as much as anything, by the support that certain rich and influential
-people gave the game. We have seen how Sir Horace Mann stole away
-Aylward. Other great supporters of the game were Earl Darnley, Earl
-Winchelsea, Mr. Paulet, and Mr. East—all before the centuries had
-turned into the eighteens.
-
-“Kent and England,” says Mr. Pycroft, “was as good an annual match in
-the last as in the present century.” But in those days, as even his own
-later words show us, “Kent,” so called, sometimes had three of the best
-All England men given in, even in a match against “England.” They were
-not so particular then—what they wanted was a jolly good game, with a
-good stake on it.
-
-“The White Conduit Fields and the Artillery Ground,” Pycroft goes on,
-“supplied the place of Lord’s, though in 1817 the name of Lord’s is
-found in Bentley’s matches, implying, of course, the old Marylebone
-Square, now Dorset Square, under Thomas Lord, and not the present,
-by St. John’s Wood, more properly deserving the name of Dark’s than
-Lord’s. The Kentish battlefields were Sevenoaks—the land of Clout, one
-of the original makers of cricket balls—Coxheath, Dandelion Fields, in
-the Isle of Thanet, and Cobham Park, also Dartford Brent and Pennenden
-Heath; there is also early mention of Gravesend, Rochester, and
-Woolwich. The Holt, near Farnham, and Moulsey Hurst, were the Surrey
-grounds.
-
-[Illustration: _THE GAME OF CRICKET_.]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From an Engraving._ _Published in 1787._
-_THE CRICKET FIELD NEAR WHITE CONDUIT HOUSE._]
-
-But there was cricket further afield. In 1790 the Brighton men were
-playing, and in the following year we find an eleven of old Etonians,
-with four players given, playing the M.C.C. team; also with four
-professionals, in Rutlandshire. This M.C.C. team went on to play eleven
-“yeomen and artisans of Leicester,” defeating them sorely, and in the
-same year the Nottingham men met with a similar fate at the hands of
-the Club.
-
-From these matches and their results we are now able, I think, to infer
-two things—first, that cricket had been played for some long while,
-not as an imported invention, but as an aboriginal growth, in these
-northern counties before these teams visited them from the south, and
-secondly, that the southern counties had brought it to a much higher
-pitch of perfection, for they could never have gone down so ninepinlike
-before any eleven of the Marylebone Club. Likely enough the inspired
-doctrine, of the straight bat and the left elbow up, of that gifted
-baker of gingerbread, Harry Hall of Farnham, had not travelled so far
-as the home of these northern folk, and in that case they would have
-been at a parlous disadvantage to those who had been brought up by its
-lights. They had not perhaps been so long in the habit of coping with
-“length” balls, which made the adoption of the left elbow up almost a
-necessity of defence. When the bowling came all along the ground it did
-not matter. Also there was in the south that prince of bowlers, Harris,
-whose magical deliveries shot up so straightly from the ground that
-it was almost essential for playing them to get out to the pitch of
-the ball. And if they had not this bowling, what was to educate them,
-unassisted, to a higher standard of batting? But they were not left
-unassisted, for the masterly elevens from the south began to come among
-them, and taught them many things, no doubt, both by example and by
-precept.
-
-This was in 1791. 1793 brings a wider ray of light on the scene of
-cricket history. Essex and Herts come on the scene as cricketing
-counties—of second class, as we should call them now, to Kent and
-Surrey, but players and lovers of cricket all the same. They combined
-elevens apparently, and played twenty-two against an eleven of England,
-which beat them in a single innings. Mr. Pycroft has a specially
-interesting note in this connection. He was told by two old cricketers,
-one a Kent man and the other an Essex man, that when they were boys,
-cricket in both these counties was a game of the village, rather than
-of clubs. “There was a cricket bat behind the door, or else up in the
-bacon rack, in every cottage.” Of course in London it was a game played
-in clubs, for they only could find the spaces where land was valuable.
-It was in the year of 1793 that “eleven yeomen at Oldfield Bray, in
-Berkshire, had learned enough to be able to defeat a good eleven of the
-Marylebone Club.”
-
-I am scandalised by the wholesale way I have to steal early history
-from Mr. Pycroft’s book. The only excuse is that I do not know where
-to go to better it, though probably I may supplement it from chance
-sources.
-
-[Illustration: The LAWS of the NOBLE GAME of CRICKET.
-as revised by the Club at S^t. Mary-le-bone.
-_From the Frontispiece to the Laws._]
-
-In 1795 he tells us of matches in which the captains were respectively
-the Hon. Colonel Lennox—who fought a duel with the Duke of York—and
-the Earl of Winchelsea. A munificent supporter of the game was my
-Lord of Winchelsea, and used to rig out his merry men in suits of
-knee-breeches, shirts, hosen, and silver caps. It was a kind of feudal
-age of cricket, when the great captains prided themselves on the powers
-of their retainers, and staked largely on the result.
-
-“In 1797,” says Pycroft, “the Montpelier Club and ground attract our
-notice,” and then goes on to speak of Swaffham in Norfolk, as a country
-of keen but not very successful cricketers. Lord Frederick Beauclerk
-took down an eleven that appears to have beaten three elevens combined
-of the Norfolk folk, and that in a single innings. This Lord Frederick
-Beauclerk, with the Hon. H. and Hon. J. Tufton, got up the first Gents
-_v._ Players match in 1798; but though the Gents, after the generous
-fashion of the day, were reinforced by the three chief flowers of the
-professional flock—namely, Tom Walker, Beldham, and Hammond—the
-Players beat them. In the same year Kent essayed to play England,
-only to be beaten into little pieces, and in 1800 they began the new
-century more modestly by playing with twenty-three men against twelve
-of England.
-
-For of course, after all has been said, the centre of the national
-game, as of everything national, was then, as now, smoky London.
-Lord’s Pavilion was then, as it had been since 1787, on the site
-that Dorset Square occupies now. In London the men collected who
-loved cricket, and had the money to bet on the game and to engage the
-services of the players. There were keener cricketers, more general
-interest in cricket, then than a little later in the century. Three to
-four thousand spectators sometimes came to see a match at Lord’s, and
-royalties sometimes took a hand in the game.
-
-In the first years of the new century, Surrey was the great cricketing
-county. Only two of the All England eleven, Lord Frederick Beauclerk
-and Hammond, came from any other county. Hammond was wicket-keeper to
-the famous Homerton Club—“the best,” says Mr. Ward, quoted by Pycroft,
-“we ever had. Hammond played till his sixtieth year, but Brown and
-Osbaldestone put all wicket-keeping to the rout”—by the pace of their
-bowling, of course.
-
-About the first decade of the century the counties seem to have been
-divided off more strictly, for cricketing purposes, than before.
-Hampshire and Surrey, as we saw, ran in double harness, the men of
-Hants helping Surrey in a match, and the Surreyites mutually helping
-Hampshire. But now they no longer play together. Broadhalfpenny and
-even Windmill Down have gone to thistles, and the gallant Hambledon
-Club is no more. Godalming is mentioned as the strongest local centre
-of the game, and in 1808 Surrey had the glory of twice beating
-England in one season. But in 1821 the M.C.C. is again playing the
-“three parishes,” Godalming, Farnham, and Hartley Row, and it is
-in the accounts of this very same year that we tumble on a dark
-and significant observation. “About this time,” said Beldham to Mr.
-Pycroft, “we played the Coronation match, M.C.C. against the Players
-of England. We scored 278 and only six wickets down, when the game was
-given up. I was hurt, and could not run my notches; still James Bland
-and the other Legs begged of me to take pains, for it was no sporting
-match, ‘any odds and no takers,’ and they wanted to shame the gentlemen
-against wasting their—the Legs’—time in the same way another time.”
-
-“James Bland and the other Legs.” At this distance of time we may
-perhaps repeat the epithet or nickname, and even class a named man
-under it, without the risk of an action for libel. Perhaps even the
-term “Legs” did not imply all the qualities which attach to it to-day,
-but in any case it is surely something of a shock to come on the
-presence of these questionable gentlemen just casually stated, not with
-any note of surprise, but merely as if they were a common and even
-essential accompaniment of a cricket match.
-
-Of course we knew quite well that our forefathers betted large stakes
-between themselves, often on single-wicket matches. This was a
-favourite style of match with Mr. Osbaldestone—the Squire,—because
-his bowling was so fast that no one, practically, could hit it in front
-of the wicket, and hits did not count for runs, in single-wicket,
-behind the wicket. In double-wicket matches he often “beat his side,”
-we are told—beat his own side—“by byes,” no long-stop being able to
-stop his bowling effectively. The chief check to the Squire’s career
-seems to have been the discovery of the famous Browne of Brighton, who
-bowled, some said, even faster. Beldham, however, made a lot of runs
-off the latter on one special occasion. This is a digression, into
-which the consideration of single-wicket matches for money—and is it
-a wonder we do not have more of them now?—beguiled me. But perhaps it
-is a good thing that we do not have them, for they may well have been
-the root and source of all the subsequent “leg-work.” The Coronation
-match is the first occasion on which Mr. Pycroft notices the “Legs,” in
-his order of writing, but lower down on the very same page he quotes
-some words of Mr. Budd, who shared, with Lord Frederick Beauclerk,
-the credit of being the best amateur cricketer of the day, relative
-to a match at Nottingham—M.C.C. _v._ Twenty-two of Notts—in which
-the same evil influence is apparent. “In that match,” he says, “Clarke
-played”—the future captain of the All England travelling team. “In
-common with others, I lost my money, and was greatly disappointed at
-the termination. _One paid player was accused of selling_, and _never
-employed after_.”
-
-Mr. Budd must have done his level best to avert defeat, too, for
-Bentley records that he caught out no less than nine of the Notts men;
-but _one paid player was accused of selling_, and Clarke was on the
-other side! However it happened, Notts won. Mr. Pycroft also says that
-in old Nyren’s day the big matches were always made for £500 a side,
-apart, as we may presume, from outside betting. Nowadays a sovereign
-or a fiver on the ‘Varsity match is about the extent of the gambling
-that cricket invites. The James Bland referred to above had a brother,
-Joe—_Arcades ambo_, bookmakers both. These, with “Dick Whittom of
-Covent Garden—profession unnamed,—Simpson, a gaming-house keeper, and
-Toll of Esher, as regularly attended at a match as Crockford and Gully
-at Epsom and Ascot.”
-
-Mr. Pycroft scouts the idea that a simple-minded rustic of Surrey or
-Hampshire would long hold out against the inducements that these gentry
-would offer them, “at the Green Man and Still,” to sell a match, and
-indeed some of the naïve revelations that were made to him by rustic
-senility when he went to gossip with it, over brandy and water, might
-confirm him in a poor opinion of the local virtue.
-
-“I’ll tell the truth,” says one, whom he describes as a “fine old man,”
-but leaves in kindly anonymity. “One match of the county I did sell, a
-match made by Mr. Osbaldeston at Nottingham. I had been sold out of a
-match just before, and lost £10, and happening to hear it, I joined two
-others of our eleven to sell, and get back my money. I won £10 exactly,
-and of this roguery no one ever suspected me; but many was the time I
-have been blamed for selling when as innocent as a babe.” Then this old
-innocent, with his delightful notions of _cavalleria rusticana_ and the
-wooing back of his £10, goes on to tell the means—hackneyed enough in
-themselves—by which the company of the Legs seduced the obstinacy of
-rustic virtue. “If I had fifty sons,” he said, “I would never put one
-of them, for all the games in the world, in the way of the roguery that
-I have witnessed. The temptation was really very great—too great by
-far for any poor man to be exposed to.”
-
-There is a pathetic dignity about this simple moralising that contrasts
-well with the levity of his previous confession, but the state of
-things that it shows is really very disgusting. It is another tribute
-to the merit of this first of English games that it should have lived
-through and have lived down such a morbid condition.
-
-“If gentlemen wanted to bet,” said Beldham, “just under the pavilion
-sat men ready, with money down, to give and take the current odds.
-These were by far the best men to bet with, because, if they lost,
-it was all in the way of business; they paid their money and did not
-grumble.” The manners of some of the fraternity must have changed, not
-greatly for the better, since then. “Still,” he continues, “they had
-all sorts of tricks to make their betting safe.” And then he quotes,
-or Mr. Pycroft quotes—it is not very clear, and does not signify—Mr.
-Ward as saying, “One artifice was to keep a player out of the way by
-a false report that his wife was dead.” It was as clever a piece of
-practical humour as it was honest. What a monstrous state of things it
-reveals!
-
-And then Beldham, inspirited by Mr. Pycroft’s geniality and brandy
-and water, goes on to assure him—as one who takes a view which the
-majority would condemn as childishly charitable—that he really does
-not believe, in spite of all that has been said, that any “gentleman,”
-by which he means “amateur,” has ever been known to sell a match, and
-he cites an instance in which for curiosity’s sake he put the honesty
-of a certain noble lord to the test by covertly proposing selling a
-match to him. But though his lordship, who seems to have been betting
-against his own side, had actually £100 on the match, even this
-inducement was not enough to tempt the nobleman from the paths of
-virtue.
-
-We will hope that no amateur did fall, and may join with Beldham in
-“believing it impossible,” but the fiction that they did was used by
-the Legs to persuade any man of difficult honesty to go crooked. “Serve
-them as they serve you,” was the argument, or one of the arguments,
-used. That “fine old man” whom Mr. Pycroft drew out so freely gives
-no edifying pictures of the players of the day: “Merry company of
-cricketers, all the men whose names I had ever heard as foremost in
-the game, met together, drinking, card-playing, betting, and singing,
-at the Green Man—that was the great cricketers’ house—in Oxford
-Street—no man without his wine, I assure you, and such suppers as
-three guineas a game to lose and five to win—that was then the sum for
-players—could never pay for long.”
-
-That was their rate of payment, and that their mode of life—perhaps
-not the best fitted for the clear eye and the sound wind.
-
-It appears that this degrading condition of cricket was brought to an
-end by its own excesses; it became a crying scandal. “Two very big
-rogues at Lord’s fell a-quarrelling.” They charged each other with
-all sorts of iniquities in the way of selling matches, all of which
-accusations, when compared with the records, squared so nicely with the
-truth that they carried conviction, and “opened the gentlemen’s eyes
-too wide to close again to those practices.”
-
-Mr. Pycroft has a note on his own account about the match at Nottingham
-in which his informant confessed to him that he was paid to lose. There
-were men on the other side who were paid to lose too, but, perhaps
-because there were twenty-two of them, they could not do it, but won in
-their own despite.
-
-It must have produced funny cricket, this selling of a match both
-ways, and Mr. Pycroft picked up a story of a single-wicket match in
-which both were playing to lose, where it was only by accident that a
-straight ball ever was bowled, but when it came it was always fatal.
-It reminds us of the much-discussed wides and no-balls bowled in the
-‘Varsity match to avert the follow-on: but, thank heaven, there is
-no suspicion of fraudulent financial motives in even the queerest of
-cricketing tactics to-day.
-
-It is truly wonderful how all heavy betting has gone out. Partly, no
-doubt, this is because men play more in clubs. When individuals used
-to get up matches the players’ expenses came very heavy; therefore
-they made the matches for a considerable stake to cover them, but the
-practice cannot have comforted the losers much. Nowadays the club pays
-players out of the subscribed funds.
-
-Why the single-wicket game is all given up is hard to say, for it is an
-age of individual emulation, but we are content with the better part
-of the game of eleven aside. And when first was that number, which
-seems to have some constant attraction for the cricketer, introduced?
-We cannot tell. It seems usual from the dawn of history. Moreover, the
-length of the pitch was always, so far as the historic eye can pierce,
-twenty-two yards—twice eleven, and twice eleven inches was the height
-of the stumps when they were first raised from the foot-high wicket.
-
-Mr. Budd told Mr. Pycroft of a curious single-wicket match in which he
-was something more than _magna_, even _maxima_, _pars_. It was against
-Mr. Braund, for fifty guineas. Mr. Braund was a tremendously fast
-bowler. “I went in first, and, scoring seventy runs, with some severe
-blows on the legs—nankin knees and silk stockings, and no pads in
-those days—I consulted my friend and knocked down my wicket, lest the
-match should last to the morrow, and I be unable to play”—on account
-of the injuries to his nankin knees, I suppose. “Mr. Braund was out
-without a run. I went in again, and making the seventy up to a hundred,
-I once more knocked down my own wicket, and once more my opponent
-failed to score.”
-
-Another interesting match that Mr. Pycroft records was Mr. Osbaldeston
-and William Lambert against Lord Frederick Beauclerk and Beldham. Mr.
-Osbaldeston, on the morning of the match, which was fixed under “play
-or pay” conditions, found himself too ill to play, so Lambert tackled
-the two of them, and actually beat them. I am sorry to say I find a
-record of a little temper shown—perhaps naturally enough—in this
-match, as on another occasion, when he was bowling to that barn-door
-bat of the Hambledon Club, Tom Walker, by Lord Frederick Beauclerk; but
-after all, what man is worth his salt without a temper? And no doubt
-both occasions were very trying.
-
-The date of these single-wicket matches was about 1820, which brings
-matters up to about the time at which a stopper should be put on the
-mouth of this gossiping and cribbing Muse of History, for we are coming
-to the days as to which men still living are able to tell us the things
-that they have seen.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _James Pollard._
-_A MATCH ON THE HEATH._]
-
-
-[Illustration: The LAWS of the NOBLE GAME of CRICKET.
-as revised by the Club at S^t. Mary-le-bone.]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER II
-
-EARLY DEVELOPMENTS OF THE CRICKETING ART
-
-By THE EDITOR
-
-
-When I first formed the presumptuous design of editing this work, it
-was my original purpose to divide this chapter into two parts, whereof
-the one should treat of the development of batting and the other of
-the development of bowling. But I very soon found that such a division
-would never do, for it would be a dividing of two things that were in
-their nature indivisible, from the historian’s point of view, the one
-being the correlative of the other, and the effects of the one upon the
-other being ever constant. Of course those effects have been mutual;
-the bowling has educated the batting, and in his turn, again, the
-batsman has been the instructor of the bowler. No sooner has the one
-changed his tactics at all than the other has changed front a little
-in order to meet this new attack. Naturally, perhaps, it seems that
-the bowler has the oftener taught the batsman, than _vice versa_; the
-aggressor, by a new form of attack, forcing on the defendant a new line
-of defence. I think it is the generally accepted view to-day that it
-is the bowling “that makes the batting,” but on the other hand one is
-inclined to think that the excellence of the Australian bowling, and
-also of their wicket-keeping and general fielding, is very much the
-result of playing on such perfect wickets that the batsman practically
-would never get out unless fielding, wicket-keeping, and bowling were
-all of the highest quality. Therefore, in that special instance it may
-rather be said that the batting, under specially favourable conditions
-of climate and wickets, has “made the bowling.” Of course the natural
-effect of playing on perfect wickets in matches that last as many days
-as you please has had its effect, and to us not altogether a pleasing
-effect, on the Australian batting, but this is scarcely the place to
-consider that feature of the case.
-
-The first point of interest to notice is that Beldham is quite at
-one with us in attributing the advance in batting to the advance of
-bowling, notably to the wonderful bowling of Harris, which was of
-that portentous character to which the name of epoch-making is not
-misapplied, and Nyren is of the same opinion with Beldham, whom he
-considers to have been the first to play Harris’s bowling with success
-by getting out to it at the pitch.
-
-We have seen, in another part of the book, that, setting aside the
-stool-ball, and the other legendary sports of the ancients, which
-were “not cricket,” the first game worthy of the name of cricket that
-appears in the dim twilight of history is the game they played at the
-beginning of the eighteenth century—say for simplicity’s sake in 1700.
-In 1700 and for some time later the wicket that men bowled at was
-formed, as we have seen, of two stumps, each 1 foot high, 2 feet apart,
-and with a cross-stump by way of a bail laid from one to the other.
-Between the two stumps, and below the cross one, was a hole scraped
-in the ground—the primitive block-hole. There was no popping-crease:
-the batsman grounded his bat by thrusting the end of the bat into the
-block-hole. Then he was “in his ground.” But if the wicket-keeper, or
-any fieldsman, could put the ball into the hole before the batsman had
-his bat grounded in it, the batsman was out. Observe, it was not a
-matter of knocking off the cross-stump with the ball, but of getting
-the ball into the hole before the batsman grounded his bat in it. It
-takes no very vivid imagination to picture the bruised and bloody
-fingers that must have resulted from the violent contact of the bat
-when there was a race for the block-hole between wicket-keeper and
-batsman.
-
-And the bowling? The bowling of course was _bowling_, all along the
-ground, as in the famous old game of bowls. Very likely it was in some
-respects the best sort of bowling for the business. With a wicket only
-a foot high, anything between the longest of long-hops or the yorkiest
-of yorkers would have jumped over it. They found out this disadvantage
-later, when they began to bowl “length” balls, which, after all is
-said, must have been far the more puzzling for the batsman. And besides
-the chance of going over the wicket, there was also the excellent
-opportunity of going through the wicket, between two stumps set as far
-apart as 2 feet. Probably this occurred so often that it did not seem
-particularly hard luck. The batsman, more probably, deemed himself very
-hardly used if he did not get two or three extra lives of this grace.
-
-And after all, though no records that I can find have come down to us
-from those times, it is safe to infer that the batsmen did not make an
-overwhelming number of runs. Had it been so we should almost certainly
-have heard of it by oral tradition, and Aylward’s great score of 167
-at the end of the century would not have stood out as such a unique
-effort. Nor have we far to seek for the reason that the scores were
-not prodigious. Though the wicket was low, it was very broad, and a
-ball running over the surface of bumpy ground, as we may suppose those
-wickets to have been, would very often have taken off the cross-stump
-only a foot above the ground. Perhaps, even, at a foot high it was more
-assailable than at two feet by these methods of attack. Then too the
-weapons of defence—the bats, so to call them—are figured more like
-the hockey-sticks of to-day—“curved at the back, and sweeping in the
-form of a volute at the front and end,” Mr. Ward’s memoranda of Nyren
-say. Of course these were very inadequate weapons of defence, and in
-point of fact no defence seems ever to have been attempted. It was all
-hit. And for actual hitting of a ball always on the ground a bat of
-this shape may not have been so very ill adapted after all.
-
-We do not know what the wiles of these old all-along-the-ground bowlers
-may have been. Probably they were fairly simple. Yet there is a
-significant word that crops up in the pages of Pycroft, that delightful
-writer, that almost inclines one to suspect these old-fashioned fellows
-of some guile. He constantly uses the expression “bias” bowling. He
-speaks of it, it is true, in connection with “length” balls, breaking
-from the pitch. But why should he have used the word “bias” unless it
-were in common parlance, and how should that singular word have come
-into common parlance unless from the analogy of the game of bowls, in
-which it is a cant term. In the game of bowls the bowls are sometimes
-weighted on one side, for convenience in making them roll round in a
-curve and so circumvent another bowl that may “stimy” them, to borrow
-a term from golf, from the jack; but sometimes—and this seems a more
-scientific form of the game—there is no bias in the bowl itself,
-but “side” can be communicated to it, by a finished player, with the
-same result as before. Now if it was the habit of these old-fashioned
-cricketers to bowl their “daisy-cutters” with bias on the ball, so that
-it would travel in a curve as it came along, the reason for the term as
-used by Pycroft is simple enough; but if this is not the explanation,
-the only alternative one is that the term first came into use—never
-having been mentioned in cricket before—for balls that broke from
-the pitch, wherein the analogy from bowls would be very far-fetched
-indeed, and the term altogether not one that would be likely to suggest
-itself. Therefore I think there is a likelihood—I claim no more for my
-inference—that these old cricketers bowled their underhand sneaks with
-spin on them, just as we often have seen them bowled—and a very good
-ball too on a rough wicket—in country cricket matches to-day.
-
-Then we come to a change, and the date of that change appears to
-involve some of the highest authorities in a certain disagreement. But
-I am going to stick to Nyren, or rather to Mr. Ward’s memoranda as
-edited by Nyren, rather than to Pycroft, both because the former wrote
-nearer to the date of the occurrences treated of, and also because
-the latter—though I love and revere his book—seems to me to have
-lumped dates together in a certain scornful, contemptuous haste, as if
-they were scarcely worth a good cricketer’s attention. Nyren, or Mr.
-Ward for him, is more careful in his discrimination, according to my
-judgment as a grave historian.
-
-According to Nyren, then, it was some time about or before 1746
-that the stumps were both heightened and narrowed. From 1 foot they
-sprang up to 22 inches in height, and from 2 feet across they shrank
-to as little as 6 inches in width. A bail crossed their tops, and a
-popping-crease was drawn for the grounding of the bat, to the great
-saving, as we cannot doubt, of the wicket-keeper’s fingers. Still,
-however, unless Nyren was mistaken, there were not as yet but two
-stumps—virtually it is certain he was mistaken in declining to
-believe that the game ever was played with a wicket of 2 feet width,
-but that does not prove him wrong in another matter in which all the
-probabilities are in his favour.
-
-We are not given any very clear reason for this change in the height
-of wickets, but we very quickly see its effects. Hitherto bowling
-had been all along the ground, the wicket being so low that it was
-almost necessary to bowl in this now derided fashion if it was to be
-hit at all. But a wicket 10 inches higher might have its bail taken
-off by a higher-rising ball, the higher-rising ball was found to be a
-more difficult one for the batsman to hit, the higher-rising kind of
-ball was thereby proved the best for the bowler’s purpose; in a word,
-“length” bowling, as they called it—the bowling of good length balls,
-as we should say—was introduced.
-
-And now, all at once, the position of the unfortunate batsman was found
-to be a very parlous one indeed. For, remember, he had in his hand, to
-meet this bowling, a thing that had more resemblance to a hockey-stick
-than a cricket-bat. There is a certain “invisible length” which, as we
-all know, is extremely difficult to play with a modern square-faced bat
-and with all the science of modern theories of wielding it. How much
-more helpless then, as Euclid would put it, must the unfortunate man
-with the bandy-stick have felt when he saw coming towards him through
-the air a ball of that length which he knew would make it impossible
-when it reached him. Batsmen must have had a most miserable time of it
-for a year or two.
-
-At length, out of their necessity was produced a new invention. It was
-about the year 1750 that the “length” bowling came into fashion, and
-very soon afterwards the form of the cricket-bat was altered to that
-straight and square-faced aspect which gave it a chance of meeting the
-new bowling—which was assailing comparatively new wickets—on equal
-terms. Obviously there ought to be some kind of relation between the
-shape of the bat and the contour of the wicket that it is concerned to
-defend, and the contour of the upright 22-inch wicket demanded defence
-by a straight bat—that is to say, at first, merely a bat straight in
-itself. The gospel of the left elbow up and the meeting of the ball
-with bat at the perpendicular had not been preached thus early.
-
-[Illustration:
- _Engraved by Benoist_ _After F. Hayman, R.A._
-_CRICKET, “AFTER THE PAINTING IN VAUXHALL GARDEN.”_]
-
-And I take it that virtually cricket, worthy to be called by any
-such great name, did not really begin before this. This game of
-trundling along the ground at a two-foot wide wicket, and a man with
-a hockey-stick defending it, is really rather a travesty of the great
-and glorious game. The origin of cricket it was, no doubt, and as such
-is to be most piously revered, but actual cricket—hardly. Consider
-that old print of a game in progress on the Artillery Fields, where the
-players are equipped with the curved bats, wear knee-breeches, and the
-wicket is low and wide, with two stumps upright and one across. There
-is not a fieldsman on the off side of the wicket—a significant fact in
-itself; but further, and far more significant, a spectator is reclining
-on the ground, entirely at his ease, precisely in the position that
-point would occupy to-day. There can be but one meaning to this
-picture—that such a thing as off hitting was absolutely unknown.
-Possibly it was difficult enough to hit to the off, even with the best
-intentions, off these bats like bandy-sticks; it is at all events
-certain that it was a style of stroke not contemplated by the gentleman
-reclining on the ground.
-
-I have spoken above of the bat as an instrument of defence. So to
-style it when writing of this era is to commit an anachronism. The
-earlier cricketers, even of the straight-bat epoch, were guiltless of
-the very notion of defence. They were all for aggression, trying to
-score off every ball. The reason of this was, no doubt, in the first
-place that the idea of merely stopping the ball had not occurred to
-them—partly because the object of the game is to score, and because
-the bandy-stick style of bat must have been singularly ill designed
-for defence; but also there is this further reason, that chance was
-much more on the batsman’s side in the old days than it is now.
-Nowadays, if a ball is straight and the batsman misses it, it is a
-simple matter of cause and effect that the bails are sent flying and he
-is out. But with the wicket 2 feet wide, and no middle stump, this was
-by no means so inevitable. On the contrary, it must have been a very
-frequent occurrence for the ball to pass through the wicket without
-any disturbance of the timber. Even when the wicket was narrowed to 6
-inches, there was still room for the ball to pass between the stumps,
-of which the fortune of the before-mentioned Small was a celebrated
-and flagrant instance. The old-time batsman was therefore not so
-essentially concerned with seeing that no straight ball got past his
-bat. He did not bother himself about defence. He gallantly tried to
-score off every ball that came to him.
-
-Yet, for all that, his slogging was not like the slogging of to-day. He
-had no idea of jumping in and taking the ball at the half-volley. His
-notions went no further than staying in his ground and making the best
-he could of the ball in such fashion as it was pleased to come to him.
-
-“These men”—the “old players,” so called in 1780—says Mr. Pycroft,
-quoting the authority of Beldham, backed by that of Fennex, “played
-puddling about their crease, and had no freedom. I like to see a player
-upright and well forward, to face the ball like a man”—at this time of
-day, the wicket had lately been raised from 1 foot to 2 feet high, but
-had for some while been only 6 inches wide, a small mark for the bowler.
-
-Mr. Pycroft goes on, quoting Beldham again: “There was some good
-hitting in those days”—towards the close of the eighteenth century
-is the date alluded to, as far as I can make out—“though too little
-defence. Tom Taylor would cut away in fine style, almost after the
-manner of Mr. Budd. Old Small was among the first members of the
-Hambledon Club. He began to play about 1750, and Lumpy Stevens at the
-same time. I can give you some notion, sir, of what cricket was in
-those days, for Lumpy, a very bad bat, as he was well aware, once said
-to me, ‘Beldham, what do you think cricket must have been in those days
-when I was thought a good batsman?’”
-
-This is instructive comment, as to the style of batting previous to
-1780—that is the date that it appears we must fix for the change of
-style that brought batting in touch with modern theories. But by the
-way we ought to notice that Beldham spoke of the fielding as being very
-good, even in the oldest days of his recollection, and Mr. Pycroft is
-careful to add a note saying that this praise from Beldham was high
-praise indeed, and eminently to be trusted, as Beldham’s own hands were
-also eminently to be trusted, whether for fielding the ball on the
-ground or for a catch.
-
-But with the year 1780 we come to a new era in the art of batting,
-associated more particularly with the name and art of a famous bowler,
-David Harris, the association being again an illustration of the truth,
-which has several times already been in evidence, that it is the
-bowling that is the efficient cause in educating the batsman—that it
-is the bowling that “makes the batting.”
-
-“Nowadays,” said Beldham to Mr. Pycroft, “all the world knows
-that”—namely, that the upright bat and the left elbow up and forward
-is the right principle of batting—“but when I began there was very
-little length bowling, little straight play, and very little defence
-either.”
-
-Beldham was a boy in 1780, and even before this, Harry Hall, the
-gingerbread-baker of Farnham, of immortal memory, was going about the
-country preaching the great truths about batting. May be he was but
-little listened to. At all events it is certain that until men had the
-straight bat to play with and the length bowling to contend with there
-can have been little opportunity or demand for straight batting.
-
-“The first lobbing slow bowler I ever saw was Tom Walker,” Beldham
-says. “When, in 1792, England played Kent, I did feel so ashamed of
-such baby bowling, but after all he did more than even David Harris
-himself. Two years after, in 1794, at Dartford Brent, Tom Walker, with
-his slow bowling, headed a side against David Harris, and beat him
-easily.”
-
-[Illustration: _AN EARLY TICKET._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _Wm. Fecit._
-_WILLIAM AND THOMAS EARLE._]
-
-And this Walker, by the way, was a wonderful fellow in more departments
-of the game than one. A terrible stick, but very hard to get out—very
-slow between wickets, so that one of the old jokers said to him,
-“Surely you are well named Walker, for you are not much of a runner”—a
-moderate jest, but showing the sort of man he was. Then he was
-“bloodless,” they said. However he was hit about the shins or fingers,
-he never showed a mark. Only David Harris, that terrible bowler, made
-the ball jump up and grind Tom Walker’s fingers against the handle of
-the bat; but all Tom Walker did then was to rub his finger in the dust
-to stanch the reluctant flow of blood. It is all very grim and Homeric.
-David Harris, rather maliciously, said he liked to “rind Tom,” as if he
-were a tree stem withered and gnarled. And it is a marvellous fact that
-a man of this character, whom you would call conservative to the core
-of his hard-grained timber, should actually have invented something
-new. But he did. He first tried the “throwing-bowling,” the round-arm,
-which was credited to Willes—probably an independent invention, and so
-meriting equal honour—many years after. Well may Nyren speak of the
-Walkers, Tom and Harry, as those “anointed clod-stumpers.” Harry was a
-hitter, his “half-hour was as good as Tom’s afternoon.”
-
-And meanwhile what has become of David Harris? David Harris, it is
-said, once bowled him 170 balls for one run. And what manner of balls
-were these? Let us consider a moment a description of David Harris’s
-bowling culled from Nyren. Parts of it lend themselves to the gaiety
-of nations, and the whole description, if not very lucid, is full
-of terror. “It would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to convey in
-writing an accurate idea of the grand effect of Harris’s bowling”—the
-effect, as a matter of fact, is conveyed a deal more clearly than
-the way in which it was produced. “They only who have played against
-him can fully appreciate it. His attitude, when preparing for his
-run previously to delivering the ball, would have made a beautiful
-model for the sculptor. Phidias would certainly have taken him
-as a model. First of all, he stood erect as a soldier at drill;
-then, with a graceful curve of the arm, he raised the ball to his
-forehead”—singular and impressive ritual—“and drawing back his right
-foot, started off with his left. The calm look and general air of the
-man were uncommonly striking, and from this series of preparations he
-never deviated. His mode of delivering the ball was very singular. He
-would bring it from under the arm by a twist, and nearly as high as
-his arm-pit, and with this action _push_ it, as it were, from him.
-How it was that the ball acquired the velocity it did by this mode of
-delivery, I never could comprehend.”
-
-Nor any one else either, for Harris was a very fast bowler. But I am
-inclined to think that there must have been some explanation to be
-discovered out of the fact that he was by profession—before cricket
-became his profession—a potter. With the strength of fingers that
-the potter acquires through working at his clay, he may have had the
-power of putting an amount of spin on the ball impossible for men
-whose digits had not gone through this course of training. In underhand
-bowling such as, after all is said, Harris’s must have been, the spin
-is almost entirely the work of fingers. The turn of wrist had little
-share in it; for one thing, it was forbidden to deliver the ball with
-the knuckles uppermost.
-
-And so it may well have been that, whatever the pace with which the
-ball was propelled, by these singular and statuesque means, through
-the air, it may have carried so much spin as to leap up twice as fast
-off the ground, as a billiard ball with much side on will seem to gain
-twice as much life after touching a cushion. And all that we read of
-Harris’s bowling shows that the balls did come off the ground with
-tremendous speed.
-
-“His balls,” says Nyren, in another place, “were very little beholden
-to the ground when pitched; it was but a touch, and up again, and woe
-be to the man who did not get in to block them, for they had such a
-peculiar curl that they would grind his fingers against the bat. Many a
-time have I seen the blood drawn in this way from a batter who was not
-up to the trick. Old Tom Walker was the only exception. I have before
-classed him among the bloodless animals.”
-
-We have seen, however, that even from him Harris occasionally drew
-blood.
-
-In Harris’s day it was the custom for the bowler to choose the wicket,
-and it was always his preference to have a bump to pitch on, and so
-help this rising tendency of the ball off the pitch. Of course this
-would be the recognised aim of a bowler of to-day, but it was not so
-recognised then, and indeed Stevens, nicknamed “Lumpy,” generally
-regarded as the second-best bowler to Harris of his day, always liked
-to bowl “o’er a brow” in order to make his balls shoot. The result
-was, as Nyren points out, that Lumpy—Lumpy of the honestly avowed
-preference for bowling “o’er a brow”—would hit the wicket oftener, but
-that more catches were given off Harris, though his balls often went
-over the wicket. But there was no manner of doubt as to which was the
-finer bowler. Harris was the man.
-
-And now as to its effect on the batting. Notice these words of Beldham,
-for really they contain the kernel of the whole matter: “Woe be to the
-man who did not get in to block them, for they had such a peculiar curl
-that they would grind his fingers against the bat.”
-
-And again he says the same in more distinct words: “To Harris’s fine
-bowling I attribute the great improvement that was made in hitting, and
-above all in stopping, for it was utterly impossible to remain at the
-crease, when the ball was tossed to a fine length; you were obliged to
-get in, or it would be about your hands, or the handle of your bat, and
-every player knows where its next place would be.”
-
-[Illustration: _MR. JAMES HENRY DARK._
-(_The Proprietor of Lord’s Cricket Ground, 1836-1864_).]
-
-[Illustration: _T. HUNT, OF DERBYSHIRE, d. 1858._]
-
-In this connection Mr. Pycroft writes as follows: “‘Fennex,’ said
-he”—“he” being Beldham again—“‘Fennex was the first who played out at
-balls; before his day, batting was too much about the crease.’ Beldham
-said that his own supposed tempting of Providence consisted in running
-in to hit. ‘You do frighten me there jumping out of your ground,’ said
-our Squire Paulet; and Fennex used also to relate how, when he played
-forward to the pitch of the ball, his father ‘had never seen the like
-in all his days,’ the said days extending a long way back towards the
-beginning of the century. While speaking of going in to hit, Beldham
-said: ‘My opinion has always been that too little is attempted in that
-direction. Judge your ball, and when the least overpitched, go in and
-hit her away.’ In this opinion Mr. C. Taylor’s practice would have
-borne Beldham out, and a fine dashing game this makes; only, it is a
-game for none but practised players. When you are perfect in playing in
-your ground, then, and then only, try how you can play out of it, as
-the best means to scatter the enemy and open the field.”
-
-So says Mr. Pycroft, a very high authority, and one whose instructions
-to the batsman are very sound and worthy of the very highest respect.
-No doubt he is right in his cautious counsel—human nature is prone to
-err on the side of rashness—but he does not notice the indisputable
-fact that it is easier to meet the ball at the pitch, if you can reach
-it, than later—always supposing it is not a rank long hop. He is
-rather inclined to treat this principle of getting out to the pitch
-as a counsel of perfection, and perhaps it is more easily put in
-practice now that wickets are more perfect than in his day, though
-if you really go out far enough—and unless you can get so far as to
-command the ball, however it break, it is surely better not to go out
-at all—the most troublesome ball has not time to develop much of its
-dangerous eccentricity before you have met it. Of course there is
-always the chance of missing it, and then there’s the wicket-keeper’s
-opportunity.
-
-But, all details of prudence apart, there is no doubt that we have
-here a totally new departure in batting, devised, as is usual, to
-meet some new requirements on the part of the bowler. A very kindly,
-genial, remarkably honest man—a really loveable man—was this potter,
-David Harris, though he did say, in chaff, that he liked to “rind” Tom
-Walker, and certainly he was an epoch-making bowler, for he made the
-ball come off the ground with an underhand action in the very way that
-is the study of our overhanders. He was a good sportsman too, and when
-he had the pitching of the wicket, tried to give Lumpy, at the other
-end, a brow to bowl over, while he chose for himself a brow to pitch
-against. No one ever seems to have hinted that Harris’s action was a
-jerk, though there were jerkers in the world in those days.
-
-Beldham and Fennex, then, were the first to pick up the new style of
-going in to meet the pitch of the ball, and so prevent its jumping up
-“and grinding their fingers on the bat.” Hitherto there had been good
-hitting, but all inside the crease, cutting and drawing to leg. Small
-had his bat straightened for the special purpose of making the draw
-stroke better. But hitherto there had been no idea of driving a shorter
-ball than a half-volley. Now first was developed the idea of going in
-to drive the ball and of forward defensive play; and therewith, as I
-conceive, the batsman’s art became, in its principles, pretty much as
-Mr. Warner found it when his school coach began his education.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER III
-
-BATTING
-
-By P. F. WARNER
-
-
-It has been said that good batsmen are born and not made, but my
-experience is rather to the contrary. There are certain gifts of eye
-and hand which all really good batsmen must possess, but I am strongly
-convinced that early practice and good coaching have a very great
-deal to do in the acquiring of all-round skill. A. E. Stoddart, whose
-retirement from first-class cricket has proved such a loss, not only to
-Middlesex, but to English cricket, is the only batsman who has attained
-to the first rank who did not start to play the game quite early in
-life, and he is the exception that proves the rule.
-
-Any success I may have had as a batsman I attribute to my devotion to
-the game from my youngest days. Early rising in the West Indies is the
-custom, but so enthusiastic about cricket was I that I often got up
-at half-past five, so as to practise to the bowling of a black boy on
-a marble-paved gallery which provided the fastest and truest wicket
-I have ever played on. Even now I am ashamed to recall the number of
-broken window-panes I was responsible for, and many was the time that
-my black hero and I have taken to our heels, to be speedily followed
-by an irate nurse, who never failed to report the damage I had done
-to headquarters. But despite many a scolding, and prophecies that I
-should come to a bad end, I persevered in my wrong-doing, and to that
-perfect marble wicket and a good coach I owe the fact that I was seldom
-guilty of running away to square leg, a fault so common among boys.
-Therefore the first essential is a thoroughly good wicket to practise
-on, and a good wicket is not a difficult thing to obtain nowadays, what
-with the improved condition of grounds all over the country. And let
-me urge on every young cricketer the absolute necessity of practising
-in earnest from the very beginning. Endeavour to play at a net exactly
-as you would in a match, and if you are bowled out, try to feel almost
-as disappointed as if a similar fate had befallen you in a game. Pay
-attention to details, and if you make a bad stroke, notice where your
-mistake lay, remember it, and take the lesson to heart. But practise,
-practise, practise, and, if you are a keen cricketer, batting at the
-net may be made almost as enjoyable as batting in a match. Well, then,
-practise in earnest from the start of your career, and if possible
-get some keen and intelligent cricketer—not necessarily a great
-one—to coach you, but one with infinite patience and tact, who will
-occasionally give a word of encouragement, for an encouraging word and
-look do a greater amount of good than is generally imagined.
-
-Having got a good wicket and a capable coach, see that a suitable
-bat is in your hand, and I strongly advise every boy to play with a
-bat suited to his strength and style; and here I may mention that
-it is a thousand times better to play with too light a bat than too
-heavy a one, for with too heavy a bat one cannot cut or time the ball
-correctly; besides, it is hardly possible to play straight with it,
-and a straight bat is the very essential of good sound batting. Giving
-the young cricketer a good driving and well-balanced bat, see that
-he puts on two pads, and at any rate one, if not two batting gloves.
-Thus equipped, he will be ready to take his place at the wicket, and
-the first thing our imaginary coach will have to teach him will be
-his POSITION AT THE WICKET. No fixed rules can be laid down as to the
-position a batsman should take up at the wicket, but undoubtedly the
-best advice that can be given is to take up the position most natural
-to him. The most popular way of standing is to place the right foot
-just inside the popping-crease, with the left just outside it, pointing
-towards the bowler or mid-off; but no two players stand exactly alike,
-and as I have said before, the most natural position is the best.
-
-There used to be a difference of opinion as to whether a batsman should
-stand with his weight equally balanced on both legs, or on the right
-leg only, but nowadays the universally accepted theory is that the
-weight should be chiefly on the right leg. At any rate, W. G. Grace, K.
-S. Ranjitsinhji, C. B. Fry, and A. C. Maclaren are all of that opinion,
-and they certainly ought to know. L. C. H. Palairet’s method of
-standing at the wicket is generally supposed to be the model attitude,
-and another cricketer whose position might well be studied is R. E.
-Foster, who, like Palairet, stands straight, but with a slight easing
-of the knees, which helps him to get a quick start at the ball. Both
-these cricketers stand as near as possible to their bats, without being
-leg before wicket, and I am a strong believer in this, for the reason
-that the nearer one is to the bat the more chance is there of playing
-absolutely straight and getting well over the ball. I am quite aware
-that there are one or two first-class batsmen who do not play with a
-straight bat, but they are men of wonderful eyesight, and their success
-has not altered my conviction that a boy should be taught to play with
-a straight bat.
-
-As for taking guard, it does not matter whether you take middle, middle
-and leg, or leg stump. I have taken all three in a season. It is a mere
-question of inclination.
-
-The bat should be held, I venture to think, in the manner most natural
-to the batsman, but the most common method is with the left hand
-nearly at the top of the handle, and the right hand somewhere about the
-middle; but there is no golden rule on the subject, and G. L. Jessop,
-for instance, holds the bat with his right hand at the very bottom of
-the handle. But Jessop is a genius, and his method should certainly
-not be copied by the young cricketer, unless the style of play Jessop
-adopts comes quite natural to him; then by all means he should be
-allowed to cultivate it. I rather believe myself in holding the bat as
-high up the handle with the right hand as possible—that is to say,
-about an inch or an inch and a half interval between the two hands.
-This is the manner in which L. C. H. Palairet holds his bat, and I have
-always regarded and always shall regard him as the model for young
-cricketers to copy.
-
-The first principle the coach has to instil into our young batsman is
-that he _must never move his right leg backwards_ in the direction of
-short leg. He may move it to jump out to drive or to cut or to play
-back, but _never should he move it away from the wicket_.
-
-This is the first point to be mastered by the beginner, for if the
-right leg is withdrawn away from the wicket, it is impossible to play
-with a straight bat, which, as I have said before, is the very essence
-of good batting. If a young batsman cannot refrain from running away,
-he should have his right leg pegged down.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_BLOCK OR PLAY._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_FORWARD PLAY._]
-
-The second principle to be inculcated is that _a_ _straight bat is
-essential to success in batting_, though I do not mean to say that the
-bat should be held straight for every stroke, for the cut and the pull,
-for instance, are not made with a straight bat; but what I mean is that
-for defensive strokes, and in some scoring strokes, the bat must be
-held straight. A batsman who plays with an absolutely straight bat is
-nearly always a strong defensive player.
-
-The third maxim is, _watch the ball_. Watch the bowler’s arm as he runs
-up to bowl, and then the ball as it leaves his hand. Watch it closely
-right on to your bat, and do not start with a preconceived idea of
-where the ball is going to pitch, and do not make up your mind to make
-a certain stroke before the ball is actually delivered.
-
-
-PLAYING THE BALL
-
-All strokes may be conveniently divided into two kinds, back and
-forward, and back play and forward play may be further divided into
-back and forward play for defensive purposes and back and forward play
-with the object of making runs. I will deal first with _Forward play_,
-and I will imagine that a good length ball has been delivered on a
-hard, true wicket. To play this ball correctly the batsman should get
-his left leg well out in the line of the ball, and then bring his bat
-as close as possible to his leg. This is the secret of all forward
-play, and the young cricketer cannot be too often urged to “get the
-left leg well out to the bat” when playing forward. Care should be
-taken not to overbalance oneself, but if body, wrist, and legs work
-correctly, the ball may be forced past the fielder, and it is really
-quite extraordinary the power that may be got into the stroke. The
-position of the hands changes during the forward stroke, the left wrist
-being on the side of the bat away from the wicket before the stroke
-is played, and on the opposite side at the expiration of the stroke.
-The ball must of course be kept down, and in order to do this the left
-shoulder must be kept well forward, pointing in the direction in which
-the stroke is made, and the bat must be at such an angle that the top
-of the handle is nearer to the bowler than the bottom of the blade. The
-whole weight of the body should be brought to bear on the stroke, and
-the batsman must make the most of his reach, and the whole thing should
-be one action and in one motion. Tom Emmett, the famous old Yorkshire
-cricketer, who was our coach at Rugby during the five years I was
-there, was never tired of teaching us this stroke. In playing forward
-the bat must be quite straight, and at the moment of actual contact
-with the ball the bat should be just behind the left leg. Now that
-the wickets are so good, forward play is a very effective weapon both
-of offence and defence to have in one’s armoury, and it is therefore
-distinctly worth while for a batsman to acquire the highest efficiency
-in it.
-
-The off drive may range anywhere from the left of the bowler to just in
-front of point, and the ball to be thus driven is one that is fairly
-well pitched up on the off side of the wicket, but not necessarily a
-half-volley. The great thing is to get well to the pitch of the ball,
-watch it, and not slash wildly at it. Care must be taken not to have a
-“go” at too wide a ball, for this is a favourite trick of slow bowlers,
-especially left-handers, and often results in an easy catch on the off
-side. There is one stroke, which is neither a genuine cut nor a genuine
-off drive, which may for convenience sake be dealt with here. The left
-leg is thrown out, as if the batsman were about to play a genuine off
-drive, but the ball is hit later than in the off drive, and with a
-horizontal rather than a perpendicular bat, the shoulders and forearm
-being brought into play rather more than the wrist. In some respects
-the stroke is very like the forward cut, of which I shall speak later,
-and many cricketers do not consider it an off drive, but rather in the
-nature of a cut. It is a useful stroke for a weak-wristed player. A
-good length ball on the off stump should be played in the direction
-of mid-off. A ball just wide of the off stump in the direction of
-extra cover, and a ball about a foot wide on the off side, should be
-played towards cover-point. The farther the ball is pitched outside
-the off stump, the farther ought the left leg to be thrown across the
-wicket, and the farther ought the left shoulder to be thrown forward.
-The wider the ball is, the more difficult it is to play, and a mistake
-common amongst beginners is that, without considering the direction
-of the ball, they advance the left leg straight down the wicket, just
-as if, in fact, the ball had pitched on the off stump, and not, for
-instance, a foot outside it. The left leg should be thrown _across the
-wicket almost in a line with the flight of the ball_. If the batsman
-plays forward at a ball a foot outside the off stump with his left leg
-straight down the wicket, he will find that the weight of his body will
-play no part in the stroke, and that should the ball break back he will
-be bowled out; therefore always remember to get the left leg well out
-to the bat, for apart from this being the golden rule for all forward
-play, there is an added advantage to be gained from the fact that, if
-the ball breaks enough to beat the bat, there will be little or no room
-for it to pass between the bat and the leg.
-
-But in forward strokes, as in all other strokes, the great thing is to
-watch the ball carefully, for should you be playing forward with “your
-head in the air,” that is to say, not looking at the ball, which at
-the last minute does something unexpected, either bumping or hanging
-on the pitch, you will for a certainty find yourself in trouble; and
-therefore, until you are thoroughly well set and have got the exact
-pace of the wicket, there should be a margin for emergencies, so that
-it should be possible to alter one’s stroke at the last moment. The
-best way of playing a ball which one has gone forward to, and which
-one finds one cannot reach far enough to smother at the pitch, is to
-adopt the “half-cock” stroke. This stroke is made by holding the bat
-quite straight just over or slightly in front of the popping-crease
-and letting the ball hit it. It is a most excellent defensive stroke,
-and the proper way to play a ball whose length one has misjudged. W.
-G. Grace uses this stroke very frequently, as does F. S. Jackson. In
-making a forcing forward stroke the great thing is to swing the arms
-well and carry the stroke right through, which if well timed will send
-the ball very quickly to the boundary. Some batsmen play this forcing
-forward stroke so hard that it is difficult to distinguish it from a
-genuine hit, and I have a very vivid recollection of a grand innings
-of a hundred odd which A. E. Stoddart played at Lord’s for Middlesex
-against Kent some five or six years ago. The wicket was hard and
-fast, and the power with which Mr. Stoddart forced good length balls
-from W. M. Bradley to the off boundary was astonishing. In offensive
-forward play great care should be taken not to bend the right knee,
-for with the bending of the right knee comes the sinking of the right
-shoulder, and if the shoulder sinks the batsman is very likely to
-get under the ball. When a batsman who is a strong forward player is
-thoroughly well set on a hard, true wicket, many of his runs will come
-from off drives, especially if the bowling be fast or medium paced, and
-the power one can get into an off drive, if body, wrist, and eye are
-working together, is almost as great as in the case of a genuine hit.
-It requires no great physique to be a powerful off driver, for a man
-of very slight build, if he is timing the ball well—and by timing the
-ball I mean the harmonious working of body, wrist, and eye—can make
-the ball travel to the boundary as fast as a strongly and powerfully
-built man. There are few better moments at cricket than when one
-has forced a good length ball through the fielders on the off side,
-standing well balanced where one is, and the ball making haste to the
-ring. There is a very conscious feeling that brain, eye, body, and hand
-have all acted in concert, and that a great deal has been accomplished
-with a minimum of exertion.
-
-
-BACK PLAY
-
-As soon as a batsman has made up his mind to play a ball back, the
-weight of his body should be transferred to the left leg, and the right
-foot should be moved back towards the wicket and the left leg drawn up
-to it.
-
-Many writers on cricket have laid it down as a rule that the right leg
-should never be moved in playing back, which may be all very well as an
-elementary principle for a boy who is just starting cricket, but which,
-I submit, with all respect, is altogether wrong if applied to one who
-has got over the initial difficulties of the game. For myself, were
-I coaching a boy, I should tell him to move the right leg in playing
-back, though of course I would never allow him to move it away from
-the wicket. With a moment’s thought it will be seen that a batsman who
-moves his right leg towards the wicket must have a better chance of
-playing the ball correctly than one who stands with his right leg glued
-to the ground. In the first place, by moving back he makes the ball
-which he is shaping at shorter than it would have been if he had stood
-where he was by the distance that he stepped back. The ball is made
-shorter by two feet if the batsman moves two feet towards his wicket,
-instead of playing it where he originally stood, and the two feet more
-which in this case the ball has to travel gives the batsman so much
-the more time to judge and play it. Again, supposing a ball pitches on
-the off stump or just outside it, the batsman will assuredly play that
-particular ball more correctly if he moves his right leg across the
-wicket in a line with the off stump than if he keeps it firmly planted
-just off the leg stump. It stands to reason that if he moves his right
-leg across the wicket in a line with the ball, he will be nearer the
-direction the ball may take after pitching than if he adhered to his
-original position. Moreover, should the particular type of ball we are
-discussing break an inch or two from leg, the odds on his being caught
-at slip or the wicket are very great, should he not move his right leg
-across the wicket; whereas, should he bring his right leg across to
-the off stump and watch the ball closely after it has pitched, he will
-stand a far better chance of playing that ball in the middle of his bat
-than if he had remained with his right leg rooted to the earth. I well
-remember a very promising boy at Rugby, one who is now a county player,
-being nearly ruined by one of the cricketing masters insisting on his
-never moving his right leg, with the result that time after time was he
-caught at slip or the wicket, for the simple reason that he was too
-far off the ball when he played at it.
-
-In playing forward, the golden rule is to get the left leg well
-forward to the direction the ball is taking, and the bat well up to
-the leg. The same rule applies in playing back. Get the right leg up
-to the line of the ball, and the bat as near as possible to the leg.
-The difficulty about moving back across the wicket is that the stroke
-requires considerable quickness of eye and foot, and quickness of foot
-is a point not half enough insisted on by the majority of coaches. All
-the best back players play back in this classical way—Victor Trumper,
-Ranjitsinhji, C. B. Fry, Tyldesley, A. C. Maclaren, and F. S. Jackson.
-If the ball in question breaks back into the batsman, he is equally
-well prepared for it, for he is well over the ball and better able to
-contend with the break, because more easily able to move his bat and
-get into position to play the stroke, than if he were standing firmly
-fixed on his right leg. Any one who thinks about the matter at all
-must see the advantage of playing in this way. It seems to me that in
-cricket the nearer the striker’s body is to the ball, the more likely
-he is to make a correct stroke, for the reason that his eye is nearer
-to the object he is striking at. If then a batsman keeps his right foot
-firmly fixed just off the leg stump to a ball which pitches on the off
-stump or a couple of inches outside it, his eye is necessarily farther
-away from that ball than if he moved his right leg across the wicket
-in the direction the ball is taking. I do not think this point can be
-insisted on too strongly by coaches. Besides, let any cricketer compare
-the two methods of playing back, and he will, I am convinced, find the
-one I have urged the easiest and most natural.
-
-I am a firm believer in this method of playing back, not only because
-all the famous players use it—and that in itself were sufficient—but
-because from one’s own experience it has proved not only the easiest,
-but by far the most effective. By drawing back the right foot towards
-the wicket, not away from it, a batsman is often able to force the ball
-away between mid-on and the bowler, or between mid-off and the bowler,
-or between short leg and mid-on, the ball in the last instance being
-played away by a quick turn of the wrist at the last moment.
-
-“It is a mistake to play back behind the legs, for it is impossible
-to put any power into a stroke when the bat is held nearer the wicket
-than the batsman himself is standing.” These are the words of K. S.
-Ranjitsinhji in the _Jubilee Book of Cricket_, and as Ranjitsinhji is
-about the best back player in the world, he ought to know.
-
-It is comparatively easy to play back as a defensive stroke, but any
-one who aspires to be a really good batsman must learn to make his
-back play a means of scoring runs. On a difficult wicket back play is
-everything; in fact, it may be safely said that a good rule to bear in
-mind on a sticky wicket is _to play back or hit_.
-
-A batsman, unless he be an experienced one, ought not to try and
-hook short balls round to leg, especially if the bowling is fast, but
-a “rank long-hopper” may be hit to any point of the compass with a
-horizontal bat; though, however short and bad a ball, it should be
-carefully watched all the way, in case of an unexpected hang or rise.
-Short and straight balls, if they do not get up to any height, may be
-flicked round on the on side by a quick turn of the wrist.
-
-In making the hook stroke the batsman should move back towards the
-wicket, turn almost square to the ball, and hit with a horizontal
-bat to the on side. The ball should be watched right on to the bat,
-so that, if it does anything unexpected, an ordinary back stroke may
-be substituted. Even a very short ball outside the off stump may be
-hooked round to leg, especially if there are seven fielders on the off
-side and only two or three on the on side. Shrewsbury, Tyldesley, A.
-C. Maclaren, C. B. Fry, K. S. Ranjitsinhji, and Victor Trumper are,
-or were, very good at this stroke, which may be made, by using the
-wrists, with an almost straight bat. Men who play the stroke with their
-arms, like A. C. Maclaren, hit across the ball. To hook a fast bowler
-is a proceeding fraught with no little danger, and ought only to be
-indulged in very occasionally, for it is a stroke that requires no
-little skill and nerve, for often the ball comes shoulder or head high
-to the batsman. A. E. Stoddart was particularly good at hitting this
-type of ball round to leg. Indeed, all round there have been few finer
-players to fast bowling than Stoddart. On slow wickets the hook stroke
-is simply invaluable, and short straight balls may be despatched to the
-boundary quite easily.
-
-
-THE BACK GLANCE
-
-A ball rather short of a good length pitching just outside the leg
-stump should be played away on the leg side with a backward movement.
-The right foot is put well back in a line with the leg stump, and the
-left foot drawn up beside it, but different cricketers play the stroke
-differently. Ranjitsinhji, for instance, moves his left leg across the
-wicket towards point, faces the ball, and plays it at the last instant
-by a quick turn of the wrist. Other batsmen turn almost right round,
-and others get right in front of the wicket. The ball must be watched
-right on to the bat, and the ball should glance away somewhere behind
-the umpire, or in the direction of long leg. It is a most useful and
-fascinating stroke, and can be employed to balls pitching on the middle
-and leg stumps, especially to a break-back bowler, though of course
-there is a danger here of being given l.b.w.
-
-
-THE FORWARD GLANCE
-
-A good length or slightly overpitched ball just outside the leg stump
-should be played in the following manner: The left leg should be thrown
-down the wicket in a line with the ball, and the moment the ball
-touches the bat, the bat should be pushed forward by a quick turn of
-the wrist, the whole weight of the body being put into the stroke. The
-body is thrown well forward, with the result that the ball will go
-round to leg at a great pace.
-
-I have found this a very useful stroke to bowlers like Mold,
-Richardson, and Lockwood, who break back into one, and, as in the
-case of the back glance, the stroke may be made to a ball pitching on
-the middle and leg stump to a break-back bowler. At Lord’s it is a
-particularly effective stroke if one is batting at the end opposite
-the Pavilion, for the slope in the ground tends to accentuate the off
-break of any bowler who is on at the Pavilion end. Altogether it is a
-very productive stroke in first-class cricket. The back glance and the
-forward glance have practically taken the place of the leg hit, though,
-with the new-fashioned type of leg-break bowling as practised by Vine,
-Braund, Armstrong the Australian, and others, the genuine leg hit was
-more often seen last season than in some past years; but with six or
-seven men on the on side, it is extremely difficult to hit a leg ball
-without running the risk of being caught somewhere on the leg side,
-especially as the Braund type of bowler bowls a good length outside the
-batsman’s legs.
-
-The square leg hit is made by advancing the left leg down the wicket,
-and hitting the ball just as it passes the left leg. It is either just
-before the ball pitches or on the rise, according to the length of the
-ball. It is a very difficult matter to keep the ball down, the complete
-success of the stroke depending upon perfect accuracy of timing. This
-hit ought only to be attempted to a ball short of a half-volley. If the
-ball is a half-volley or well up, the correct stroke is in front of the
-wicket or square to leg with a vertical bat.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_THE DRAW OR PULL._]
-
-I am inclined to think that the glance stroke is preferable to the
-square leg or long leg hit, for it is quite as good for scoring
-purposes, and the ball can be watched right on to the bat, and placed
-and kept down with far greater certainty.
-
-
-THE PULL
-
-differs from the hook stroke in that it is more in the nature of a
-drive. The pull stroke is used to hit a ball pitched outside the
-off stump round to leg, and the stroke may be applied either to a
-half-volley or a good length ball outside the off stump.
-
-W. W. Read used to be the great exponent of this stroke, and
-Ranjitsinhji also plays it with wonderful certainty. It is a dangerous
-stroke, for the ball which can thus be treated requires very careful
-choosing, and it is the difficulty of choosing the right ball which
-makes the stroke dangerous. The left foot should be thrown out to the
-pitch of the ball, and just as the ball rises from the ground it should
-be hit round on the on side with a horizontal bat. It is often a very
-useful stroke on a sticky wicket, to a bowler who is breaking back,
-though there is some risk of being caught at deep square leg, rather in
-front of the wicket, by the fielder who is almost invariably placed
-there when the wicket is helping the bowler.
-
-A straight half-volley is a ball which every player ought to be able to
-drive, and it should always be hit in the most natural direction. It is
-a mistake to try and pull a straight half-volley. The chief point to
-remember in hitting a half-volley is to get as much swing as possible
-into the stroke. One or two batsmen swing the bat so far back that they
-occasionally hit themselves with the back of the bat on the head. The
-shoulders should come greatly into play in the drive, for they give
-added power to the swing of the arms, and throw the weight of the body
-with great force on to the left leg at the moment of hitting the ball.
-
-In driving, the back of the left hand remains facing the bowler,
-instead of being on the opposite side of the handle, as in the case
-of forward play. The bat, as in forward play, must be kept as near as
-possible to the left leg. Batsmen who are quick on their feet often
-jump out to the pitch of a ball, and thereby make it a half-volley.
-Victor Trumper, the finest batsman Australia has ever produced, is the
-great exponent of this stroke, and the rapidity with which he gets to
-the ball is astonishing.
-
-It is, if successfully played, a very useful stroke, for nothing is
-more apt to put a bowler off his length than by thus attacking him. It
-is of course a stroke more suitable for slow bowling than for fast.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_THE LEG VOLLEY._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_THE CUT._]
-
-
-THE ON DRIVE
-
-Nearly every batsman prays for a half-volley on the leg stump, or one
-pitching within three or four inches of the leg stump, for, if properly
-timed, it is a stroke which sends a thrill of joy through the batsman.
-If the ball pitches on the wicket, the hit should be made between the
-bowler and mid-on, though with a break-back bowler the ball may often
-be forced wide of mid-on’s right side. If the ball pitches outside the
-leg stump, it should be hit anywhere to the right of mid-on.
-
-The whole body should work in agreement, the arms should swing freely,
-and the stroke should be well followed through. Nearly all the great
-batsmen play this stroke to perfection, but none better than F. S.
-Jackson.
-
-
-THE CUT
-
-There are three classes of cuts: the forward cut, the square cut, and
-the late cut.
-
-The forward cut is made at a shortish ball outside the off stump, the
-right foot being kept still, but the left foot brought across in the
-line of the ball. It is a stroke that requires very accurate timing,
-but when timed well, the ball often goes to the ring like a flash of
-lightning, somewhere between point and cover-point. W. L. Murdoch plays
-this stroke particularly well, as do A. O. Jones, H. K. Foster, and W.
-Gunn, while C. H. B. Marsham made the great majority of his fine 100
-not out in the ‘Varsity match of 1901 by its means. It is a somewhat
-dangerous stroke, for should the ball hang or bump unexpectedly, an
-uppish hit will in all probability follow.
-
-The square cut sends the ball just behind point, and is made by moving
-the right foot across the wicket in a line with the off stump; and just
-as the ball is passing the batsman’s body, the bat is brought down by
-a quick movement of the arms, while more power is added to the stroke
-by a sharp flick of the wrists. The bat should be slanting downwards
-towards the ground, in order to get well over the ball.
-
-Tyldesley of Lancashire plays the same cut as well as any one else,
-though he often hits across the ball rather than over it, a fine
-stroke, harder than if he had got over the ball, being the result. His
-method is, however, a little dangerous, as there is a chance of the
-ball going up, though Tyldesley seems to have brought the stroke to
-perfection.
-
-In the late cut the right foot is moved across to the same position
-as in the case of the square cut, but the ball is hit _after_ it has
-passed the batsman’s body. The most suitable ball for the late cut is
-one pitched wide of the off stump, not quite so short as the ball for
-the square cut, but still short of a good length. It is essentially a
-wrist stroke, and a man with a weak wrist will be wise not to attempt
-it. Late cutting requires a little manœuvring-ground, and care must be
-taken to avoid cutting at a ball too near the wicket.
-
-There are few players who cut late really well, for the stroke requires
-the greatest nicety in timing and a strong, flexible pair of wrists.
-Ranjitsinhji makes this stroke with great certainty and brilliancy, but
-then he possesses an extraordinarily supple pair of wrists.
-
-There is another kind of cut, called the “chop,” which should be used
-to a short ball outside the off stump which keeps low after pitching.
-The bat should be brought down with great force horizontally, and if
-well timed the ball will go very hard. This is a favourite stroke
-of Sir T. C. O’Brien, K. G. Key, Victor Trumper, and R. E. Foster,
-who in the ‘Varsity match of 1900 brought off this stroke on several
-occasions off E. M. Dowson’s bowling. On a hard, true wicket, against
-fast or medium-paced bowling, forward play is the best; against slow
-bowling and lobs play back or hit is, generally speaking, the soundest
-advice that can be given a young cricketer, though on some wickets slow
-bowling may be played forward to, and even forced forward. But every
-really good slow bowler varies his pace. Five out of the six balls
-may be more or less of the same pace; but one ball out of the over is
-generally a fast one, or at any rate medium pace. Rhodes, the Yorkshire
-left-hander, bowls a very good fast ball, which comes across quickly
-with his arm, and the same may be said of Blythe of Kent and Cranfield
-of Somerset; while amongst slow right-handed bowlers C. M. Wells, for
-instance, is constantly varying the flight and pace of the ball. But in
-distinguishing the different styles of play which should be adopted
-in playing fast and slow bowling, it is well to remember that to fast
-bowling one plays forward to score runs, while to slow bowling you play
-forward to defend your wicket; though, as I have said before, a slow
-bowler may often be pushed forward between the fielders for one and two
-and sometimes four runs.
-
-I do not think that batsmen jump out enough to slow bowling, for there
-is nothing so demoralising to a bowler as a batsman who comes out of
-his ground and hits when the ball is at all overpitched. Remember, if
-you do make up your mind to jump out and hit, to get right to the pitch
-of the ball; forget, too, for the moment, that there is such a person
-as the wicket-keeper.
-
-When the bowling is fast enough to compel the wicket-keeper to stand
-back, I have found it a good plan to stand a foot or two outside the
-popping-crease. This tends to put the bowler off his length, for he
-finds his good length balls hit on the half-volley, and this, for the
-time at any rate, is apt to disconcert him.
-
-[Illustration: _EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BATS, WHICH BELONGED TO THE FOURTH
-DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH._]
-
-[Illustration: _CELEBRATED BATS._
-_The one on the left belonged to Alfred Mynn, 1850; the centre one
-was originally used by Merser, of Kent (left-handed batsman); and the
-right-hand bat by E. Bagot, 1793._]
-
-In playing lobs you may stand in your ground and play back,
-occasionally scoring a single, but in dealing with lobs offensive
-tactics are the best, for, as a great general once said, “The best
-method of defence is to attack.” Lobs should therefore be either hit on
-the full pitch or played back, and the batsman should stand a little
-easier on his right leg than if he were playing fast or medium bowling,
-so as to be ready to jump out and take the ball on the full pitch the
-moment he sees that it is slightly overpitched. By far the best lob
-bowler of the present day is D. L. A. Jephson, the Surrey captain, for
-he varies the flight and pace of the ball extremely cleverly, often,
-indeed, sending in quite a fast good length ball. He can, too, make
-the ball break both ways, and many people think that he might with
-advantage to Surrey bowl more than he does.
-
-Batting on a hard, true wicket and on a sticky, difficult one are two
-entirely different things, and one often sees a man who is a fine
-player on a fast wicket absolutely at sea when rain has ruined the
-pitch. A left-handed bowler like Rhodes is then in his element, for
-he pitches the ball a good length on the leg stump; it comes across
-quickly to the off, and you stand a very good chance of being either
-bowled, or caught by David Hunter at the wicket, or snapped up by eager
-and lengthy John Tunnicliffe at short slip. Haigh, also of Yorkshire,
-is an extremely difficult bowler on this kind of wicket, for the amount
-of off break he can get on the ball is prodigious; while Trumble,
-the Australian, is probably as hard a bowler to play under these
-circumstances as ever lived.
-
-As a rule the hitting or “long-handle game,” as it has been called,
-pays best under these circumstances, but some men who are really strong
-in their back and on side play can play their ordinary game. A strong
-defensive back player can often get a good length ball which breaks
-back away on the on side for two or three runs, while a good puller has
-a great advantage on this kind of wicket. The man who does not watch
-the ball, and watch it well, will have little or no chance on a sticky
-wicket. At one time there were very few men who could play at all
-successfully on a really difficult wicket, but of late years, what with
-the general improvement in back play—due chiefly to Ranjitsinhji’s
-influence on the game—the number, though far from being large, has
-increased. Victor Trumper, F. S. Jackson, Ranjitsinhji, C. B. Fry, A.
-C. Maclaren, T. L. Taylor, and Tyldesley are the best batsmen we have
-under conditions favourable to the bowler, and I shall never forget an
-extraordinary innings Ranjitsinhji played at Brighton in July 1900 for
-Middlesex _v._ Sussex. When stumps were drawn on the second evening
-of the match, Ranjitsinhji was not out 37, the game up to that time
-having been played on a perfect wicket. Rain, however, fell heavily
-in the night, and with the sun coming out next morning, the wicket
-was altogether in favour of the bowler. Vine made 17, but no one else
-on the side that day got more than 5, excepting Ranjitsinhji, who was
-last man out, l.b.w. to Trott, for 202! He gave one chance in the long
-field when he had made about 160 runs, but apart from this, his batting
-was absolutely without a flaw. Most of his runs came from hard drives,
-chiefly to the on, and strokes on the leg side. It was an astonishing
-innings, and its full significance was possibly not appreciated until
-Tate, on an exactly similar wicket, dismissed a powerful Middlesex
-eleven for just over 100 runs.
-
-[Illustration: _WAR-WORN WEAPONS._]
-
-[Illustration: _RELICS OF PAST ENGAGEMENTS._]
-
-A few words now on running. Never attempt a run if you feel any doubt
-as to its safety, for it is better to lose a possible single than to
-run out your partner. At the same time, I do not think that cricketers
-as a rule run as well as they ought to between the wickets. The
-Australians are an exception; they are extraordinarily quick.
-
-Always back up two or three yards; when you call, call in a decided
-manner. If your partner calls you, run hard if you intend to go; if
-you do not, stop him at once. The great thing is to make up your mind
-instantly.
-
-If you are the striker, and you play the ball in front of the wicket,
-_always say_ something—either “Yes,” “No,” or “Wait.” If you hit the
-ball behind the wicket, your partner at the bowler’s end should call,
-but as to whether the striker or non-striker should call the hit to
-third man many cricketers differ. The best plan, in my opinion, is to
-arrange with your partner. In that event a disaster is not likely to
-occur.
-
-Always run the first run as hard as you can, and always look out for
-a second run when the ball is hit to the long field, for even to a
-Tyldesley, a Denton, or a Burnup, good runners, who understand one
-another, may often with safety get two for a drive to the long field
-when a slower runner would be content with a single.
-
-There are, too, very few third men to whom one cannot run. I do not
-mean to say that a run should be attempted to third man when the ball
-goes hard and straight to him on the first bounce, but for a stroke
-a little to one side of him there is frequently a run. But the two
-batsmen must use their own discretion—and as has been said, _it is
-a thousand times better to lose a run than to risk running out your
-partner_. I was twice run out in the ‘Varsity match of 1896—to a
-great extent my own fault in the second innings,—and since that
-game—memorable for the fact that Oxford, going in with 330 runs to
-win, hit off the number for the loss of four wickets, and for the
-no-ball incident which led eventually to an alteration in the follow-on
-rule—I have taken particular pains to improve my running between the
-wickets. I am not often run out now, and I hope I but seldom run my
-partner out—_Experientia docet sapientiam_.
-
-Many batsmen, when nearing their 50 or 100, attempt the most absurd
-runs. This fault is more common amongst professional cricketers than
-amongst amateurs, for the reason that all the counties, with the one
-exception of Yorkshire, give their professionals a sovereign for every
-50 runs they make. This so-called “talent-money” has been the cause
-of many a run-out. Yorkshire gives no “talent-money,” but over and
-above the usual fee of £5 or £6 a match, each professional is “marked”
-according to his work in a particular game. For example, if a man made
-25 runs on a bad wicket at a critical time, or even 10 not out in a
-one-wicket victory, he would be marked according to the merit of his
-performance in the eyes of his captain—in this case Lord Hawke. A fine
-bowling feat or a fine catch would be similarly rewarded. Each mark
-represents five shillings, and this system might with advantage be
-adopted by other counties.
-
-[Illustration: _GEORGE PARR, THE FAMOUS NOTTINGHAM BAT._]
-
-[Illustration: _“N. FELIX” (N. Wanostrocht)._]
-
-There is one thing that no coaching will teach a young cricketer, and
-that is confidence. Time alone can give him that, for confidence is a
-plant of slow growth. I do not believe the cricketer who says he has
-never been nervous—he is certainly not a first-class cricketer if he
-adheres to that statement; but nervousness will gradually disappear as
-a batsman gains confidence in himself. I have known men who when they
-first played county cricket were almost paralysed with nervousness, but
-who after two or three years’ experience went out to bat with every
-confidence. Nervousness is undoubtedly a great handicap, and young
-players should try to overcome this weakness as soon as possible.
-Too much confidence is a mistake, for, to go back again to the Latin
-grammar, _nimia fiducia calamitati solet esse_. But too much confidence
-is better than no confidence—and by confidence I do not mean conceit,
-but a belief in one’s own capabilities, founded on past deeds.
-
-There are cricketers, too, who are so superstitious as to be almost a
-nuisance. There is the man who thinks he cannot make runs unless he
-goes in in a particular place. These men are somewhat annoying, but I
-think a captain should always try to humour them, if by so doing he is
-not upsetting the batting order of his side.
-
-The typical instance of superstition affecting one’s play at cricket
-seems to me to have been exemplified in the case of the Rugby boy who,
-alighting at the St. John’s Wood Station on the Metropolitan Railway,
-for the Rugby and Marlborough match, saw the advertisement of Mr. John
-Hare’s play, _A Pair of Spectacles_, staring him in the face. That boy
-had made heaps of runs during the summer at Rugby, but he came on to
-the ground fully convinced that he would make a pair of spectacles, and
-make them he did.
-
-Again, G. O. Smith, to whose splendid batting Oxford were mainly
-indebted for their victory over Cambridge in 1896, had a firm
-conviction that he could only make runs in a certain pair of trousers;
-and G. J. Mordaunt, the Oxford captain of the previous year, took it as
-an evil omen, when, on awaking on the morning of the ‘Varsity match,
-he saw from his bedroom window the flag with “Druce” in large letters
-on it flying from the Baker Street Bazaar. W. E. Druce was captain
-of the Light Blue eleven that year, and Mordaunt’s feeling of coming
-disaster was, I regret to say, justified by the result of the match,
-for Cambridge beat us by 134 runs.
-
-Coaches should be careful to avoid cramping the style of a young
-batsman, and of suppressing individuality and budding genius. Batsmen
-cannot be all of one type. Had G. L. Jessop been made to play according
-to the rules laid down, a great hitter would have been lost to the
-world, and England would never have won that last test-match at the
-Oval, for there would have been no Jessop on the side to accomplish
-what was, perhaps, the finest piece of hitting ever seen on a
-cricket-ground. It is useless trying to make a Barlow into a Lyons, or
-a Lyons into a Barlow.
-
-Always endeavour to reach the ground in good time before a match
-begins, and to have five or ten minutes’ practice; though there are
-some batsmen who do not believe in too much net practice. Every man
-must of course decide what suits himself best, but I cannot believe
-that a few minutes at a net can do anything but good, for one gains a
-sight of the ball, and gets the pace of the wicket.
-
-If you are put in to bat anywhere but first, always remember that it is
-your duty not to take more than two minutes in getting to the wicket,
-for that is the limit allowed by law. This is most important, for you
-have no right to keep your partner waiting, and to waste time.
-
-No one will ever become a great batsman without enthusiasm, and
-enthusiasm of the kind which will carry him through the inevitable
-disappointments and troubles of his early career. The path to success
-is not easy, and success comes only to the few. But the goal once
-reached, he must be a poor man indeed who does not feel a glow of pride
-on seeing the magic figures 100 going up on the big scoring-board at
-Lord’s beneath his name; for believe me, the satisfaction is so great,
-and the applause such sweet music, that it is worth while taking the
-greatest pains to attain the proficiency necessary to the achievement
-of the feat. There is, too, a subtle charm and fascination about
-the game which creates among its devotees a bond of fellowship and
-_camaraderie_ which nothing can alter.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_THE BOWLER._
-(_Alfred Mynn_).]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER IV
-
-BOWLING
-
-By D. L. A. JEPHSON
-
-
-To those that have time hanging all too heavily on their hands, and in
-good truth know not what to do—to those perchance that may, through
-lack of occupation, be compelled amid adverse circumstances, finding
-that anything is occasionally better than nothing, to peruse these
-jagged, untrimmed sentences—I would say this: that for many days,
-with a deep determination of purpose, I have perused the writings of
-our great cricketers—I have read the golden words of Grace, of Steel,
-of Ranjitsinhji—and have arrived hot-haste, sick at heart, at the
-conclusion that I cannot retell what has so often been told by them,
-and told so clearly, so succinctly, with such prodigious insight into
-the profound ramifications of this art. And so, like some pale-faced
-curate sitting fear-bound beneath the terrifying presence of a ruddy
-bishop, I must perforce scratch with a rusty pen of the bowlers I have
-met. In the ten years of my cricket life I have met many.
-
-Let us divide them into classes. We will take the old-time division;
-we will divide them into four—those that are of a slow pace, those
-that are of a medium pace, those that are fast, and those semi-moribund
-trundlers, the dealers in lobs.
-
-Having myself started in my early days with the firm conviction that
-this old game of cricket was the best game for boys and men of moderate
-years that the ingenuity of generations had invented, I became also
-convinced that to be a great bowler was the highest pinnacle of fame,
-and at the same time of usefulness, that a cricketer could hope to rest
-on.
-
-The work, without doubt, is hard, the labour of the day strenuous, but
-the pleasure of bowling a length with the wicket a bit in your favour,
-with a side that are trying to field, and not loafing as “little mounds
-of earth or waxen figures in a third-rate tailor’s shop,” is a goodly
-thing, a thing to dream of. And this craft of bowling is so sure, so
-certain. A great batsman may make a mistake, even on the Oval in the
-height of summer, even on the Oval in the height of perfection—and
-all those that have played there know the miraculous opportunities for
-run-getting this ground affords—he may make a mistake, let us say,
-bowled Richardson, 0! Well, for the day he is done—up to now of no
-use to his side, of no use to himself. Now, take the great bowler on a
-wicket of this excellence, or of any other. He can make a mistake, drop
-a slower one a bit too short, overpitch the well-intentioned yorker,
-falter in his stride and be placed to leg for four. What matter from a
-selfish point of view? His fun for the day has not departed. He bowls
-and bowls, and continues to bowl; and probably the blind goddess gives
-in the end the wherewithal to be cheerful. Therefore, on this miserable
-lowest ground of self-interest, be a bowler!
-
-And then again, when he has done a noble thing—or perchance it is his
-birthday, and the elements give heeding to his call—there falls, let
-us say, a gentle rain in the early-bird hours, and a hot sun scorches
-from 10 to 12. He has got his money on a two to one chance (and nobody
-else in the race)—Peel, Rhodes, Haigh, Jack Hearne, the wonderful
-George Lohmann, and dozens more. What does the other side make? They
-are lucky to make 100—lucky to make 70!
-
-To be a bowler on a bit of bird-lime is the biggest certainty the
-cricket world has knowledge of. You may meet a Ranjitsinhji, a Bonner,
-a Jessop, or a Frank Crawford; but if you don’t meet these, the odds on
-you are as the odds on an arc light to a farthing dip.
-
-Again—for a moment to raise the platform on which we have
-been discussing so casually this selfish side of the bowler’s
-existence—there can be little doubt that of the three branches
-of the game (batting, bowling, fielding), bowling is the pivot on
-which the other two turn. Who is the more use to his side—the great
-batsman or the great bowler? Nine out of ten intelligent beings answer
-unhesitatingly, the bowler; and rightly too, especially if he be
-of medium pace, or even slow medium, on a great variety of wickets,
-ranging from the fiery, cast-iron, stone-strewn rock of an Old Trafford
-wicket (I don’t mean for a second that the Old Trafford ground is often
-in this state, but when it is, it is a little faster, a little more
-susceptible of bump, than anywhere else I know) down to Bristol or
-Southampton after a wet day, he is invariably of supreme assistance to
-his side. And what a number of graduated shades of differing wickets
-there are, from the sun-scorched cracking clay, where the fast bowler
-finds your fingers, or failing these your ribs, where your runs are
-made through the slips or first hop over their heads to the boundary,
-down through the varying degrees of good, natural, fast wickets to the
-Valhalla of batsmen, let us say Taunton, the Oval, or Bristol, where
-the ball rarely rises stump high, and where there is as much life
-in the wickets as there is in a barrel of oysters! On grounds like
-these the batsman assuredly cometh into his own, and metaphorically
-layeth the bowler by the heel, bruising him hip and thigh through
-the weary hours of an August day, till the welcome news of the last
-over revives the rag of a man that is left, and he slowly wends his
-way to the rabbit-hutch, in sore need of the well-earned bath and its
-ensuing rub down—in sore need of a ginger beer. Perhaps there are too
-many of these superexcellent wickets; perhaps, from certain batsmen’s
-point of view, there are not. But the moment the rain appears, the
-bowler is another being; in the language of the card-room, he wears
-a four-ace smile, and there is a corresponding depression in the
-countenance of the great batsman. All down the still more numerous
-phases of wet, sticky, and real bird-lime wickets (impossible for
-nine out of ten batsmen)—down through all these the four-ace smile
-remains, and it is only when we arrive at the thoroughly sodden ground,
-with a faint drizzle or slight showers at convenient intervals, when
-the ball is wet, the footholds greasy, and there are bucketfuls of
-sawdust besprinkled here, there, and everywhere, that the batsman again
-reverses the situation, and, like an overfed fox-terrier, has acquired
-another poor rat of a bowler.
-
-I say overfed advisedly—not that he is replete with runs on too
-many occasions in an ordinary season, when a fair amount of rain
-falls, and the good and bad wickets are allotted us fairly evenly,
-and a decent percentage of catches are held (which is very seldom
-the case); but when he glues himself for a day or day and a half to
-some easy-paced billiard-table wicket, where a blind boy could stay
-with a toothpick, I say he is overfed—he gluts himself with runs;
-and though, as I have said before, he has, in my humble opinion, less
-chances of distinguishing himself than the medium-paced bowler, and
-is in consequence of less value to his side (which, after all, is the
-very essence of the game), yet when his opportunity arises he overeats
-himself to an astonishing degree, and often grouses to a similar extent
-as the rat of a bowler catches him by the tail with a duck and one on a
-wicket of sun-baked clay.
-
-I have sorely digressed, but the trend of the digression was this, that
-if as a youth you wish to play cricket, devote all your time, all your
-energies, to bowling. A great bowler is born, not made; but though you
-may never soar to the heights of a Spofforth or a Lohmann, you can
-learn to bowl a good length, you can learn to bowl intelligently, and
-be a source of comfort to yourself, and, what is infinitely better, in
-all probability a source of comfort to your side.
-
-We have divided the bowlers of to-day and yesterday into four: it
-were better to say three, leaving the few dealers in lobs to huddle
-themselves into a minute band that can nowadays follow many leagues
-behind the great cavalcade that comprises the real three divisions.
-Lobs are occasionally useful things to carry round with a side, but
-should in a healthy team be used medicinally.
-
-They act as a stirring tonic to men in the field who have grown lazy
-and careless from lack of work, for with all the lobs I have ever seen
-there is always a blissful uncertainty as to where a good batsman will
-place the next one; and some players hit them so uncomfortably hard
-that it is best for the slackers to keep their weather eyes open, or
-they may experience a rude awakening. There is no more exhilarating
-spectacle on a cricket-field than to see a drowsy dreamer of a field
-receive the ball in a most unexpected place, on the wrist or the ankle,
-on the nose or somewhere where the injury is not likely to be serious.
-
-[Illustration: _WILLIAM LILLYWHITE._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _W. Bromley._
-_JOHN WISDEN._]
-
-Three years ago at the Oval, I remember, Sam Woods was watching a
-match, and a certain individual in an immaculate sweater, brilliantly
-decorated in front with letters a foot long, sauntered on to the field.
-It was evidently a part of the game with which he had no sympathy. Sam
-glared down on him, and in his terse phraseology commenced—
-
-“Who’s that feller?”
-
-Some one mentioned a name. “I know,” says Sam. “I know the silly
-bloomer.... He was fielding in the country—I was playing—up she went
-in the air—he was fast asleep—catch her, you fool!—and he caught
-her—_plumb on the nut_.”
-
-And this genial cricketer was pleased for the rest of the day at the
-mere recollection.
-
-At last we have arrived, through devious paths, at our three great
-divisions. Many bowlers whom I class as slow may in reality consider
-themselves to be medium; many medium may prefer to be known as fast;
-and perhaps there may be a very few fast bowlers who prefer the
-description of medium—but I doubt it.
-
-First and foremost we must place the Old Man, or Old ‘Un, as we so
-endearingly like to speak of him. There can be but few people in this
-country who do not know this full-bearded, full-bodied figure of a
-man—the few short shuffling strides, the arm a little above the
-shoulder, the right hand a shade in front of him, the curious rotary
-action before delivery, _and the wonderful length_.
-
-The hand is large and the ball well concealed, and as you face him,
-for he stands full fronted to you, it seems to leave by the back door,
-as it were, that is, over the knuckle of the little finger.
-
-I have played with him many times, but he does not seem to me to do
-very much (of course I am speaking of a good wicket), but some come
-a little higher, others a little lower, some a little faster, some
-slower; on the middle leg is his favourite spot—two or three off the
-leg stick with a square deep who is not asleep, then a straighter one
-with a “bit of top on it”—the batsman tries to push to leg—there is a
-somewhat excited _’s that?_ and the would-be run-getter is sauntering
-pavilionwards.
-
-Certainly of all the slow bowlers I have met he is the most successful
-against _new faces_, whether they are young or old. He generally bowls
-them neck and crop, or else they are l.b.w., and it makes very little
-difference if the batsman is an Australian wonder, or a boy in a
-village school: they come in and they go out, and they can’t understand
-it—it looks so extremely harmless. They forget the master-hand, with
-the master-mind to work it; they forget the wonderful perseverance! If
-you can’t get them out over the wicket, try round; if you can’t succeed
-this end, have a rest and try the other.
-
-To-day he may bowl a trifle slower than he did twenty years ago. It
-seems to me, however, that he bowls with very much the same effect. He
-is a bowler that stands by himself. As long as I can remember, no one
-has ever compared “W. G.” with any other bowler; he stands alone—it
-is a distinct form of attack. We hear of Rhodes being contrasted with
-Peel, and Peel discussed in relation to Peate, and so on in thousands
-of instances, but the Old Man stands by himself, with a style, a
-method, a success of his own.
-
-Of really good amateur slow bowlers, during the last twelve years, in
-which time I have been more or less nearly connected with first-class
-cricket, there has been a phenomenal dearth.
-
-They can literally be counted on the fingers of a man’s hand. As I
-write only two stand out—C. L. Townsend and C. M. Wells. Of course
-there have been others, and there are others, but unless I have missed
-my way through the long lists of bowlers through which I have passed,
-I have lighted on no names that, without some slight stretch of the
-imagination, one could place on anything like the same level with the
-two already mentioned. Should there be any, I sincerely apologise for
-their omission. A. G. Steel and E. A. Nepean never entered into my
-short first-class cricket experiences.
-
-I have met them both, however, in club games, and even with the small
-amount of natural and acquired intelligence at my disposal, I could not
-fail to see how good they must have been at their best.
-
-One feat of Nepean’s I remember well. He was playing for the Gentlemen
-_v._ the Players at the Oval. Arthur Shrewsbury was batting, and Nepean
-was bowling, if my recollection fails me not, at the gas-works end,
-and, greatly to the astonishment of many of us present, _bowled him
-round his legs!_
-
-Great as was the astonishment of the spectators, it paled before the
-wonder of the two in question, and the tale went round on the morrow
-that gentle sleep had failed to visit their respective couches on the
-evening of this memorable day. One was said to have lain awake all
-night marvelling _how on earth he had done it_, and the other _how on
-earth he had let it be done!_
-
-Whether the tale be of truth or otherwise I know not, but it was a ball
-that probably Nepean will remember long after he has ceased playing
-even club cricket.
-
-The one exception that proves the rule that great bowlers are born and
-not made is C. M. Wells. To the best of my belief, when he started
-his career at Dulwich as a bowler, he was of the shut-your-eyes,
-bang-’em-down, never-mind-where-but-plug-’em-down style. Only a slight
-success, I think, attended his efforts in this direction, and so,
-having seen some good slow bowler on the school ground, assiduously
-worked day after day at the nets, until up at Cambridge he proved
-himself to be on his day one of the finest slow bowlers we have seen.
-He possessed, and still possesses, a wonderful command of length, with
-plenty of spin from the off—a considerable variation of flight—a
-slower ball with several inches of break from leg, delivered, by the
-way, from almost the palm of the hand, and a ball that, as it comes
-sailing up the pitch towards you, has every appearance of being
-intended for a leg break, but which in reality is simply propelled with
-a large quantity of “top on.” It comes naturally quick off the ground,
-and it comes along straight as a die, and many a batsman has ceased
-from troubling, out l.b.w., through playing for a break that did not
-exist. I should perhaps not have said ceased from troubling, for it is
-a curious fact, and one for which there seems no adequate explanation,
-that though a batsman generally grumbles a little at being given out
-l.b.w. to a fast bowler, a _rara avis_ is occasionally found agreeing
-with the decision; men as a rule grumble and trouble themselves vastly
-being dismissed in a similar manner to a slow ball, and a _rara avis_
-in this connection is almost as the dodo.
-
-Of Wells’ fast ball I am perhaps not so eulogistic, but no doubt he
-uses it as an astute hunter uses dead wood and briars to cover the many
-pitfalls into which his intended victims are to cast themselves. This
-end or that end, he never tires; if the laws of the game permitted it
-he would bowl both; and as regards fielding his own bowling, I think he
-is the best I have ever seen. I remember once at Cambridge in the Long
-Vac. playing with him—I think it was against the M.C.C. I know the
-side included Shacklock and Barnes. The latter was batting, and Wells
-let go a slow full pitch, and poor old Barnes dashed at it as a dog at
-a dinner. Wells, as he generally is, was well up the wicket, his legs
-well apart, looking for what he could find. Barnes found the full toss,
-and Wells the ball. As the veteran passed me at mid-off, his face was
-as the face of a man who stoops to pick up a sovereign and finds a
-brass button. It was the hardest catch, I should think, ever made at a
-range of 10 yards from the gun, and Barnes was no niggard with the wood!
-
-Having played with and against Wells a great many times, I have had
-copious opportunities of watching him closely. He invariably starts
-with the ball in the left hand, and in the first stride or two throws
-it into his right. For the off break it falls into a cradle of fingers;
-the middle digits are spread open, while the first and fourth are bent
-double at the second joint. The ball rarely touches the thumb; the
-natural straightening of the first finger at the moment of delivery
-imparts the required break; but to bowl a length without the use of
-the thumb, and to train your fingers to fall at will into this cramped
-position, involves considerably more patience and practice than the
-average cricketer cares to give.
-
-Here again I shall digress. In all the excellent works on cricket
-that at one time or another I have so diligently studied, I find
-most elaborate instructions on this same subject, the holding of the
-ball—“Always use your fingers,” “Never use the palm of the hand,”
-etc., etc.; but despite all this worthy advice, I have never yet seen
-two bowlers gather their fingers, or fingers and thumb, round the
-ball in such a manner that the hand of one could not for an instant
-be confused with the hand of the other. The length of their run may
-occasionally coincide, very occasionally their stride may be of the
-same compass, but these are the only two similar characteristics
-which any two bowlers may be said to possess. The action and method
-of handling the ball are as different in different bowlers as the
-features on the face of the one are unlike the features on the faces
-of the others. George Lohmann, one of the greatest bowlers that has
-ever lived, spread his long, sinuous fingers (in which I include the
-thumb) at almost equal distances round the whole circumference of the
-ball. Spofforth, on the other, held only half the ball, the little
-finger underneath, with the thumb on the top, both resting on the
-seam—believing, as at billiards, that a ball struck on one side will
-of necessity spin in its run or flight in the direction of the side
-to which the propelling force was given. Turner, on the other hand,
-covered the whole of the circumference, with the ball resting nearer
-the palm of the hand than is the case with the majority. Mead, again,
-being blessed with a long, strong forefinger, produces the same off
-break with this finger and the slight use of his thumb and second
-finger. Those who have played against Albert Trott know well the
-particular delivery when they see part of the ball projecting below his
-little finger, and the strong thumb standing straight up in the air;
-it is practically propelled by the second, third, and fourth fingers.
-I give these simply as a few instances. Every bowler, whether first
-class, second class, or “no class,” has a peculiar method of his own,
-some idiosyncrasy, however slight, in his manner of gripping the ball,
-and this, too, _in addition_ to the varying flexibility, the varying
-“flicks” or “whips” of the wrist, that each in his very own way
-employs.
-
-Now for C. L. Townsend—by accident this is a suggestive phrase, and
-one that in his prime exactly describes the plan of action adopted by
-the incoming batsmen—“Now for Charles,” “Go for him”—and they went;
-and a great number came back sorrowing—bowled round their legs with a
-two-foot break, stumped a couple of yards, caught at cover trying to
-drive, bowled with an off break or a fast one—out in every possible
-way. Bowling with a high, shambling action, he was very deceptive in
-the flight and very deceptive in the pace, the ball coming slow in air
-and fast off the pitch with as much finger leg break as he wanted.
-
-On a sticky wicket, unlike the majority of slow leg break bowlers, he
-could, if he wished, leave it alone and rely almost entirely with very
-satisfactory results on the off break, bowled a bit faster. And, like
-Wells, he could bowl all day, and did until towards the end of his
-regular cricket career, when he forsook the stony path that a regular
-first-class bowler must tread for the scented groves where dwell our
-great batsmen, and, lapped in the luxury of 2000 runs per annum,
-forsook to a great extent his former mistress.
-
-Among all the famous slow left-handers there is one that to me stands
-out more clearly than the rest, whether his striking personality—for
-who did not know that bouncing ball of a man?—whether his wonderful
-all-round skill, or his possession of that golden quality on a cricket
-field, the golden quality of _life_, stood uppermost in my mind, I
-cannot say, but to this day, as often as I think on the game, there
-always arises the short, thick-set figure of poor Johnny Briggs.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _W. Bromley._
-_ALFRED MYNN._]
-
-[Illustration: _JAS. COBBETT._]
-
-Buffoon, perhaps, at times, but never with an obnoxious buffoonery.
-And what a bowler! The ball left his hand with a finger flick that
-you could hear in the pavilion, and here was every known variety of
-flight: three or four short, half walking, half running strides, and
-the ball was at you, spinning like a top; first a balloon of a ball
-that would drop much farther off than you thought, a lower one just
-on the same spot, both breaking away like smoke; then another, with
-nothing on, straight at the sticks; and then you saw the arm come
-round a shade faster, and, if you weren’t on the watch, you found you
-had struck a snag in the form of a really fast yorker, bowled at a
-considerably greater pace than you have ever received one from either
-Peel or Rhodes. Poor Johnny! I have no space to dilate further on your
-wonderful gift of bowling with this indefinite “_you_.” In conclusion,
-as this chapter seems rapidly to be casting itself into the mould of
-personal reminiscence, I will relate my last two meetings with you.
-
-We were playing at Hastings in the Week. “W. G.” was in command. It
-was my lucky day, having made 50 or so by blind slogging, and the
-liberal help of a sluggish field. The Doctor suggested you should try
-the Chapel end. I took 28 off the first three overs, six of them
-fours, mostly well off the off stump, bouncing up against the canvas at
-square leg. I remember the aggrieved look on your face as you remarked
-to the Old Man, “That’s not much of a stroke, Doctor,” and the Doctor
-answered, “It’s all right if you can do it, Johnny”; and then, Johnny,
-you were taken off.
-
-We were playing at Lord’s, North _v._ South. It was a perfect wicket.
-I was in need of a few runs to end the season with. Poor Johnny was
-bowling, and bowling as well as ever, a bit faster on the fast wicket,
-and going considerably with his arm.
-
-“W. G.” had made as good a 130 as he ever made in his life. I went to
-the wicket, played two, and the leg stump leant wearily back with a
-ball that pitched on the middle and off—0!
-
-The second innings, through the clemency of Ernest Smith, I avoided a
-pair. I got to the other end and faced Johnny: the same ball, the same
-languid attitude of the same stump, and the balance was mightily in
-your favour, Johnny, as it always was.
-
-He was a great bowler on his day, a bowler that was never done with,
-and the void he has left on the cricket field will not be filled for
-many a day, if ever it be filled at all.
-
-The mind of every cricketer naturally associates with the memory of
-Briggs the names of the other two great left-handers, Peel and Rhodes;
-and what a wonderfully successful trio they have been, and what an
-amount of amiable argument has been expended in the vain attempt to
-decide which is the greatest of the three! I prefer to bracket the
-three. And as no side is thoroughly equipped for attack without the
-inclusion of a bowler of this stamp, had the captain of a side the
-first call on the services of these two, he no doubt would include Peel
-on a fast wicket, and in the event of the rain falling, would give the
-preference to Rhodes. The smile on the face of either of them after a
-goodly shower, and an hour or two’s stickying sun, has struck terror
-into the heart of many a creditable run-getter.
-
-My first experience of Peel was at Cambridge. As usual, and rightly
-too, my place was number eleven on the list. There was six minutes to
-time, and the good MacGregor told me to buck up and go in. So into
-the dark I went, and, backed by the luck that sometimes falls to most
-undeserving persons, I stayed through an over and a half of Robert—not
-out 0 at night, and my last game for the ‘Varsity! On the morrow, on
-not a very easy wicket, my marvellous luck remained with me, and stayed
-with me even until lunch! 41! It must have been a dreary show. I only
-instance this to once again emphasise the old old truism of what a game
-of chance this cricket is. Here was I playing in my last match, playing
-as a bowler, but, as the vulgar say, “couldn’t bowl for toffee,” or any
-other desirable sweetmeat. Here was I, number eleven, and by a kindly
-turn of fortune’s wheel allowed to stop Bobby Peel for two hours and a
-half. Well, that six minutes in the dusk gave me ten years’ cricket,
-so _I_ have nothing to grumble at in the luck of the game!
-
-As every one knows, Yorkshire owe much of their great success to the
-efforts of these two. Always to be relied upon—always ready to bowl
-either end for two or twenty overs at a stretch: bowlers that a captain
-can put on for an over, and knowing that neither of them will throw
-away a couple of fours trying to find their length. Should we compare
-the actions of the two, we must award the palm for style and easy
-rhythmic swing to Peel. To Rhodes we must allow the greater amount of
-spin.
-
-Wilfred, as his intimates designate him, for some years had a bad time
-when he journeyed with his friends to the Oval, for he nearly always
-struck a fast wicket, and very few bowlers are affected to the same
-extent as he is by the varying conditions of the ground.
-
-On the Oval we have generally managed to score against him, provided
-it is fine; but give him a little rain, and he gets his own and a bit
-more back. I remember, three years ago, at Kennington, Yorkshire and
-Surrey both made over 300. On the third day of the match there had been
-rain, and a blistering sun was doing its best to give the spectators
-their money’s worth in the afternoon. In this it succeeded. Yorkshire
-held a lead of about 25. “Another drawn match, I suppose,” was heard on
-every side; but the members and their friends don’t quite realise the
-enormous difference of Rhodes, and of Rhodes and Haigh coupled, on a
-dry and on a sticky wicket.
-
-Latterly, Surrey have been anything but a good side on a bad wicket,
-and those of us that knew this were by no means so happy in our minds,
-and our dismal forebodings came very nearly being realised. Haigh at
-the pavilion end and Rhodes at the gasometer did exactly as they liked.
-The former, with practically only three men on the off and innumerable
-short legs and silly mid-ons, bowled a perfect length off the off
-stump, coming back anything from three inches to a foot. Only once
-during the sorry rot that ensued did he get hit on the off. Rhodes, now
-a totally different bowler from the day before, plugged away on the off
-stump, and did exactly as he liked with the ball.
-
-_Four wickets for 8_, and an hour and a bit to go! Poor old Surrey
-in the soup again! It certainly looked like it, for the mouldy eight
-runs on the tins were only hoisted there by a mighty effort and a
-considerable amount of luck. All out 15; and it would have been so had
-not Hayward stayed forty-five minutes, amassing another 8, and for
-Tom Richardson’s pluckily slogged 17. The total, I think, reached by
-devious and rugged, very rugged paths, 51—and so Yorkshire were robbed
-of a well-earned victory. Rhodes had his own back, as he always does
-have it back when sun and rain put their heads together and strive
-strenuously for his welfare.
-
-On another occasion that I recollect we made the handsome compilation
-of 37 against him and Wainwright at Bradford. The score-sheet was
-covered with “Stumped Hunter, b. Rhodes, 0.” It was a most catching
-complaint, and five of us succumbed to it. It attacked us in two
-distinct varieties. We either played forward and slipped—“Stumped
-Hunter, b. Rhodes, 0,” or we charged gaily up the pitch for home or
-glory. The result was precisely the same—“Stumped Hunter, b. Rhodes,
-0.”
-
-But enough of Rhodes. Helped by his two good god-parents, sun and rain,
-the subject is a painful one to us of the south.
-
-His co-helper in this match, Wainwright, is another bowler to whom the
-varying conditions of weather, and consequently of wickets, makes a
-phenomenal difference—perhaps more strikingly pronounced even than to
-Rhodes.
-
-Harmless enough on a good wicket, on a bad one he could make the ball
-do what he liked. Many, of course, can do this; but they cannot make
-it turn with the astonishing rapidity from the pitch that Wainwright
-could. Slow in its flight, yet on touching the mud it would rush at
-you—I had almost said bite you—at any rate bowl you as you were
-playing back for the hang.
-
-And now, my indulgent reader, we will make full sail southwards, with
-the brave north wind full astern, to the headquarters of the cricketing
-world, the abode of the all-powerful M.C.C. Here we find a slow bowler;
-I call him slow, for though bowling every conceivable pace, I always
-maintain that he is at his best when four or five out of the six sent
-down are leisurely in their progress up the pitch, mixed up with one or
-two so exceedingly fast that “eye cannot follow them in their flight.”
-I refer to Trott, or “Alberto,” as he is generally called.
-
-[Illustration: _WILLIAM LILLYWHITE._]
-
-[Illustration: _WILLIAM CLARKE_,
-_Famous for Underhand Bowling_.]
-
-A bowler of infinite resource—at times no doubt he gives many runs
-away through the persistence with which he tries new theories, new
-dodges, or a new action; but he is one of the few bowlers that
-the batsman is compelled to watch more closely than many another.
-Personally, I have retired from the conflict with Albert through
-every one of the exceedingly varied methods by which he has removed
-obstructing batsmen. As a rule he bowls with a decidedly low action,
-with any amount of off break on—with every degree of pace. Again the
-ball is held in the last three fingers, and a powerful upright thumb
-confronts the player opposed to him; this is generally a “pull-backed”
-one which hangs most uncomfortably in the air. The next comes as the
-lightning, and as likely as not catches you full pitch on the toe,
-or hits the bottom of the stumps as you are lifting the bat to play.
-At his best (for sometimes I have seen him bowl for hours without
-employing his fast one) it is as fast a ball as one wishes to meet,
-and its pace is made in the last of the few short steps Trott takes.
-Should he be unsuccessful, he will suddenly raise his arm and deliver
-one right over his head at a medium pace, which very often whips back
-sharply from the off, or, reverting to something like his original
-action, he will bowl an over or two of slow leg breaks, which, if their
-length is not all it should be, break about as much as Harry Trott was
-wont to break, and that is saying a good deal.
-
-He is a bowler that I have never seen tired, and a wonderful gatherer
-of unconsidered trifles in the way of almost impossible “c. and b.’s.”
-He stands in front of you like a brick wall, and you’ve got to hit
-it mighty hard for him to let it go by. Truly a great worker, this
-Anglo-Australian, as the papers so frequently call him.
-
-At Taunton, a year or two ago, we invariably came across the slowest
-overhand bowler that has played in first-class cricket for ten years or
-so. Tyler was for a long time the stumbling-block in the way of many
-sides, more particularly of Surrey. Time after time he has bowled us
-out on all sorts of wickets—it was too slow, too high in the air, and
-consequently such a long time coming to you. Dozens of players I have
-seen bowled trying to sniggle one to leg, and if they were not bowled
-they were out l.b.w. Of course he has been “planted” again and again
-into the churchyard, but he knew what he was doing, and a ball a little
-higher or a little shorter found a resting-place in the safe hands of
-Palairet or Daniell on the pavilion rails. He has much to thank Sam
-Woods for. Wicket after wicket has he got at mid-off through Sam’s
-fearless fielding, and run after run has he been saved. A great many
-cautious batsmen, too, have been irritated into hitting through the
-close proximity of Sam at silly point, and this silly point to a bowler
-of Tyler’s pace is no sinecure, even with the most gentle of batsmen.
-I often wonder that this placing of a man right under the batsman’s
-nose is not more often adopted, as the result seems always to justify
-it, for whether you get the man out or not, he is most decidedly put
-off his game. It is not, however, a place to go to sleep in, even with
-the mildest of performers. I was sorry that Tyler should have been
-no-balled at the close of his career, for the day on which he was
-penalised there seemed to be no difference whatever from the action he
-always had, and which was universally passed for years.
-
-Of the leg-break bowlers there is Braund, one of the best all-round
-cricketers of the day. He is second only in the matter of pace to Vine,
-and he is easily first in the matter of length and direction—perhaps
-not so difficult as Vine is at his best, but he always bowls well,
-consistently well, on all sorts of wickets, and he is never punished to
-the extent the other bowlers of this class are when one is lucky enough
-to catch them on an off day.
-
-There are many other slow bowlers of whom I should like to scribble,
-but time presses, and we must pass on to our second division, to the
-bowlers of the medium pace, whose numbers are as sands on the seashore.
-
-There is very little doubt that the bowlers who comprise this our
-second division are in the majority of instances of more general value
-to their side than the faster bowlers, for the obvious reason that they
-can always obtain a foothold.
-
-They can also bowl longer at a stretch, they can vary their pace,
-they can alter the whole principle of their attack to suit the varying
-stages of a wicket in a way that is given to very few of our really
-fast bowlers. There are, too, so many that one must include in this
-class, that it is a matter of considerable difficulty to make anything
-like an adequate selection. There are some, however, whose names will
-immediately occur to the minds of every average cricketer.
-
-I asked W. G. Grace not long ago, “Who was the best medium-paced bowler
-you ever played against?” Almost without thought the answer came back,
-“George Lohmann”; and there is many another player who, asked the same
-question, would make answer in a similar strain.
-
-We all knew that tall, fair-haired, broad, rather high-shouldered
-figure—a splendid worker in every section of the game. Great as the
-pleasure was in studiously watching the man bowl, or watching him bat,
-taking the extraordinary risks he did, to my mind an almost equally
-enjoyable thing was to watch him at extra slip. Before his time there
-were good slips, bad slips, fast-asleep slips, and since his time every
-variety of “slipper” has passed across the stage, but none ever had the
-same catlike activity, the same second-sight to practically foretell
-the flight, the pace of a ball, and the same safe pair of hands to hold
-it in.
-
-But I am presumably writing on bowling and not fielding. The following
-description of George Lohmann by C. B. Fry is one of the very best
-things of the many that he has done:—
-
- He made his own style of bowling, and a beautiful style it was—so
- beautiful that none but a decent cricketer could fully appreciate
- it. He had a high right-over action, which was naturally easy
- and free-swinging, but, in his seeking after variations of pace,
- he introduced into it just a suspicion—a mere suspicion—of
- laboriousness. Most people, I believe, considered his action to have
- been perfect. To the eye it was rhythmical and polished, but it cost
- him, probably, more effort than it appeared to do. His normal pace
- was medium; he took a run of moderate length, poised himself with a
- slight uplifting of his high square shoulders, and delivered the ball
- just before his hand reached the top of its circular swing, and, in
- the act of delivery, he seemed first to urge forward the upper part
- of his body in sympathy with his arm, and then allow it to follow
- through after the ball. Owing to his naturally high delivery, the
- ball described a pronounced curve, and dropped rather sooner than the
- batsman expected. This natural peculiarity he developed assiduously
- into a very deceptive ball which he appeared to bowl the same pace
- as the rest, but which he really, as it were, held back, causing the
- unwary and often the wary to play too soon. He was a perfect master
- of the whole art of varying his pace without betraying the variation
- to the batsman. He ran up and delivered the ball, to all appearances,
- exactly similarly each time; but one found now that the ball was
- hanging in the air, now that it was on to one surprisingly soon. He
- had complete control of his length, and very, very rarely—unless
- intentionally—dropped a ball too short or too far up. He had a
- curious power of making one feel a half-volley was on its way; but
- the end was usually a perfect length ball or a yorker. He had that
- subtle finger power which makes the ball spin, and consequently he
- could both make the ball break on a biting wicket and make it “nip
- along quick” on a true one. He made a practice of using both sides of
- the wicket on sticky pitches. If he found he was breaking too much,
- he would change from over to round the wicket, and on fast pitches he
- soon had a go round the wicket at a batsman who appeared comfortable
- at the other sort. But he was full of artifices and subtleties, and
- he kept on trying them all day, each as persistently as the others,
- one after another. With all his skill, he would never have achieved
- his great feats but for his insistence of purpose. He was what I call
- a very hostile bowler; he made one feel he was one’s deadly enemy,
- and he used to put many batsmen off their strokes by his masterful
- and confident manner with the ball. He was by far the most difficult
- medium-pace bowler I ever played on a good wicket.
-
-In the spring of a year eighteen summers ago three or four of us were
-playing cricket on the wilderness of Clapham Common. A young man
-watched the game for a little, and eventually took a hand. He bowled to
-us and he batted for us, and we learnt something. At the end of half an
-hour he left. We asked his name. “Lohmann,” came the reply. We said,
-“Good-morning, and thank you.” And to-day I think that there are dozens
-of committeemen all over the country, and especially in the county of
-Surrey, who would like to go out into the same or a similar wilderness
-and encounter another George Lohmann. They may go out hot haste to find
-one, but they will return empty-handed.
-
-In reply to the same question that I asked W. G. Grace, Ranjitsinhji
-said, “Noble.” Now of Noble I have not had sufficient experience to
-write, so I asked him again, and the next answer was, “Jack Hearne”;
-and for perfection of action, with its open-shouldered, almost
-three-quarter arm swing, I have never seen his equal. He has every
-variation of pace, and, on a wicket that suits him, as much off break
-as he wants; and he bowls, or did bowl at his best, a length that only
-a very few bowlers like Alfred Shaw ever excelled. It has been said
-that on a perfect wicket he plays a man in. Well, perhaps he does; but
-those of us who on a sticky wicket at Lord’s—and at Lord’s a sticky
-wicket spells perdition—have had the temerity to stand up against him,
-bowling as he nearly always is from the pavilion end, know with what
-difficulty he can be stopped, and with what superhuman effort scored
-off.
-
-Two other great medium-paced bowlers appeal immediately to the player
-of cricket—Attewell and Mead—both of a wonderful length, and doing a
-bit either way, not in the same way as Jack Hearne, who is practically
-an off break bowler, with a fast ball going with his arm, but with
-distinctive finger or hand break going both ways.
-
-Who does not remember Attewell’s easy, full-faced run up to the wicket,
-the splendid control of length—a very machine, but a machine with an
-untiring human intelligence. Both these two are perfect gluttons for
-work—this end, the other end, both ends, all day and probably all
-night if the span of the hours for play were lengthened. Attewell I
-should have taken on a good wicket, and Mead on a bad.
-
-The latter I remember years ago at Broxbourne, where he and I led the
-attack for the local club, and wonderfully successful he was; but
-in those days he bowled almost entirely leg breaks, and it was only,
-I believe, after journeying Leytonwards, that he developed the off
-theory, with an occasional straight one and with an occasional leg
-break, that ultimately gave him the position amongst great bowlers that
-he holds to-day.
-
-Lancashire some seasons ago possessed a quartette that very few sides
-have been able to equal. I refer to Briggs, Hallam, Cuttell, and Mold.
-Each of the four obtained a hundred wickets. Lancashire were playing
-at the Oval; the wicket was on the slow side, not very difficult and
-not very easy; each of the four had a turn, and in this particular
-match Hallam bowled extremely well. In my own mind he was at his best
-one of the most difficult of medium-paced bowlers, for the flight was
-so deceptive. He has a good variation of pace, but the bad luck he has
-had in his health has clung to him in the matter of bowling—there seem
-to be more missed chances, more balls that beat the bat and evade the
-wicket, than fall to the lot of many another bowler in the same class.
-
-[Illustration: _LORDS GROUND EARLY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Water-Colour by_ _H. Alken._
-_ONE ARM AND ONE LEG MATCH._]
-
-In the matter of length, in the knowledge of the art of bowling, in
-his phenomenal success, there is one man in this our second division
-who occupies an almost unique position—Alfred Shaw. Every one knows
-the records that he holds, but there is one thing that at the time of
-its occurrence certainly was the subject of much gratifying comment,
-and this was Alfred Shaw’s astonishing resurrection in first-class
-cricket, which hardly to-day receives the recognition that it merits.
-Sussex journeyed to the Oval. Shaw, who for a considerable time had
-given up first-class cricket, was included in the side, and those of
-us who were playing against him saw and realised one of the finest
-pieces of bowling ever given on a perfect Oval wicket. Surrey’s score
-was well over 300. Shaw bowled one end and then the other till he had
-completed 50 overs. _During this time only 60 odd runs had been scored
-from him_, and there were seven Surrey victims labelled Shaw in the
-score-sheet. He bowled as only a marker could bowl, and every man that
-proceeded to the wicket either played a bit too soon or a bit too late
-at some period or other of his innings. It was a remarkable bowling
-performance, and remarkable evidence of stamina of a bowler not in the
-first flush of youth.
-
-Another in this same class, and who at the start of his career was
-engaged on the staff at the Oval with his future club-mate Hulme,
-was George Davidson, a fast medium bowler with a longish run and an
-imperturbable length—full of life and vigour, and a man whose place in
-the side Derbyshire have not yet been enabled to fill.
-
-Tate, like Rhodes, is again a cricketer to whom the state of a wicket
-makes a phenomenal difference, even more so than is usually the
-case. Given suitable conditions, there are few bowlers that can make
-the ball come up faster off the pitch than Tate. He bowls a really
-good length, and can apply the off break at will, and for years has
-stepped into the breach for Sussex and saved the rest of his side
-many many wearying hours of fielding. And now to make an end of our
-second division we will include F. S. Jackson and J. R. Mason. It is a
-very moot point whether they should be termed fast or medium—let us
-say they are fast-medium. It really does not matter much what we call
-them, for any one whose patience has held out thus far in this article
-has no doubt seen them both bowl again and again. F. S. Jackson is a
-confident bowler; he bowls with a confidence born of the past, and
-with an unlimited confidence in the future, and to this self-reliance
-I attribute a large proportion of his success. Bowling fast-medium,
-with an occasional off break and an occasional slow ball, he invariably
-manages to keep the runs down, and at the same time to take his quota
-of wickets; and a bowler that can go with Sam Woods through the whole
-of a Gentlemen _v._ Players match unchanged must be a really good
-bowler, even though as we watch him we cannot exactly determine how he
-succeeds as he undoubtedly does.
-
-J. R. Mason is probably a bit faster than Jackson. He has a free
-upstanding delivery, an easy run up to the wicket, and a full-arm
-swing. He bowls a good length just off the off stump, and on his day
-and with a wicket in his favour can make the ball do a lot from the
-off. Sam Woods said that he had never in his life seen much better
-bowling than Mason’s in the Somerset _v._ Kent match at Taunton in
-August 1901. The home side were dismissed for 74 and 78, Mason’s share
-of the wickets being four for 26 and _eight for 29_, an excellent
-performance for any amateur on any wicket.
-
-The last of our three divisions now claims our limited attention, and
-here it would be as well if I made yet another apology: the names of
-many of the great Australian bowlers have been omitted from these
-pages, from the fact that I have so seldom played against them. Of
-Giffen, Palmer, Turner, Ferris, Jones, and the “Demon Spofforth” I
-wish I could write, but what I could say of them would be as the sum
-of the runs I should in all probability have made against them. As I
-said before, to the cricketer who has got his heart and soul in the
-game, there is nothing much more exhilarating than the sleepy field
-being rudely awakened to a just sense of his duties. Speaking from a
-spectator’s point of view, there is nothing more exciting than to watch
-the uprooting of the sticks, to note their gyration in the direction of
-the glorified long stop, and to follow the flight of a bail for fifty
-or sixty yards. To this end we must possess ourselves of a really fast
-bowler.
-
-The best natural fast bowler, taken at the zenith of his fame, was
-Tom Richardson. Those of us that have watched him pounding away hour
-after hour and day after day at the Oval, have marvelled much at
-the wonderful natural spin, and have marvelled perhaps more at his
-inexhaustible energy and neverending fund of good-humour. He was never
-tired and never out of sorts, and when the wicket was badly broken
-I have known him time after time slacken his great pace for fear of
-injuring an opposing batsman. Always, and rightly too, one of the most
-popular players that ever stepped on to a cricket-field, still to-day,
-when perhaps his prime is past, there is no figure more welcome to the
-thousands that throng our grounds than the figure of “Long Tom,” as the
-crowds delight to call him. It was indeed a gustable tit-bit to watch
-him in 1894 bowl Essex out at the Oval, taking the whole ten wickets
-himself.
-
-A noteworthy fact in connection with Richardson, in the four years when
-he aggregated over 1000 wickets, was the great success he met with on
-all sorts and conditions of wickets. He could be quite as deadly in the
-slime or on a drying wicket as on the fieriest piece of asphalt. Now
-this ubiquitous wicket-taking is given to practically no fast bowler
-that I have ever seen, with the exception of Spofforth, and he did it
-not by bowling his usual great pace, as was the case with Richardson,
-but by slowing himself down to the speed of a Haigh or a Jack Hearne.
-
-It is the general opinion of many of our greatest cricketers—W. G.
-Grace and Ranjitsinhji, for example—that on a fast good wicket, and
-when bowling at the top of his form, we have never known the equal of
-Lockwood. Bowling with a long bouncing run, he can make the ball flick
-higher and faster from the pitch than any other bowler in this our
-third class. There is at times the very devil in it, and when the ball
-is not rapping incontinently at your fingers, it is hitting the middle
-and leg from well outside the off stump. One of the finest balls bowled
-that failed to get a wicket was bowled by Lockwood to Ranjitsinhji at
-the Oval three or four seasons ago.
-
-[Illustration: _From an Engraving Published in 1784._
-_A MATCH AT THE GENTLEMAN’S CLUB, WHITE CONDUIT HOUSE, ISLINGTON._]
-
-I was standing at mid-off, and can see it to this day. Ranjitsinhji had
-just come in to bat, and was, I think, still on the mark. It was very
-fast; it pitched three to four inches off the off stump, and came back
-like lightning. I listened for the pleasing rattle of the sticks, but
-at the eleventh hour—no, I had better say the last hundredth part of
-a second—Ranjitsinhji’s right leg was bent across, and he received
-it full on the thigh. There was no other player living who, having
-failed to stop it with his bat, could have got his leg there in time.
-He certainly acquired a bruise, but the pain of this surely and swiftly
-dwindled in an innings of over 190!
-
-One of the finest victories Surrey ever won over Yorkshire was at the
-Oval. On a perfect wicket Surrey scored over 300 on the first day and a
-portion of the second. Richardson at the pavilion and Lockwood at the
-gasometer end started the attack, and on the same magnificent wicket
-_dismissed Yorkshire for 78!_ Of these, Jack Brown made 48! Those of us
-who were playing, and those who were lucky enough to have visited the
-Oval that day, could never in their lives have seen finer fast bowling.
-Both bowled at a tremendous pace, both bowled at the top of their form;
-they seemed almost to be bowling man against man, to be vying for
-supremacy. It was a great day to catch the finest natural fast bowler
-in conjunction with the finest cultivated fast bowler making sad havoc
-of a very powerful side. It was in the second innings of Yorkshire that
-poor Frank Milligan made his last appearance at the Oval, and right
-well he played, making 64 out of a total of 170 odd. (I should have
-mentioned before that F. S. Jackson was unfortunately incapacitated
-from batting through an injured thumb. This of course greatly weakened
-the Yorkshire batting, but at the time Lord Hawke said he had rarely
-seen finer bowling.)
-
-Of Arthur Mold this can be said with absolute certainty, that no bowler
-ever attained a similar pace with such a minimum of exertion—two or
-three long loose strides, two at a trot, and an arm swinging round
-like a flail, a good length, great pace, and on any wicket at times a
-considerable flick back from the off—a bowler that, like Richardson or
-Lockwood, might bowl a man at any period of his innings, however well
-set he might be. For as many of us know, there are certain bowlers,
-generally of the slow or medium class, that a respectable batsman,
-after an hour or so’s stay at the wicket, can negotiate with safety,
-unless of course some violent risk be taken. With these three, and
-perhaps one or two more, it is quite possible to be bowled neck and
-heels when taking no risk whatever.
-
-Of all the other fast bowlers I have met, the majority, and it is a
-large majority too, either go with the arm or go up the pitch straight
-as a die. Wass and Barnes are exceptions to this general rule, for
-under favourable conditions they bowl with a distinct leg break, and
-very difficult to play they are.
-
-George Hirst, I think, stands in a section of fast bowlers entirely
-his own. It is a curious thing that we possess so few really fast
-left-handers. Hirst is equipped not only with great pace, but also
-with an extraordinary swerve, that is to say, he does not always have
-it under his immediate control, but when starting fresh and with a new
-ball, he swirls inwards in a stump-uprooting manner, and the swerve
-seems to take place in the last two or three yards of the ball’s
-flight. I remember seeing Captain Bush confront him last year at Leeds
-for the first time. Hirst came up to the wicket with his swinging run,
-the ball left his hand; Bush’s left leg shot out for his slashing
-stroke by cover, and it was only by astonishing luck that at the very
-last moment he stopped a yorker almost behind his right foot, and in
-stopping it overbalanced and lay prone—thus emphasising the luck
-he had experienced and the amount of the swerve. With a new ball it
-usually stays with him from twenty minutes to an hour, and it can occur
-again after a sufficient rest and the acquisition of another new ball.
-I think I am doing Rhodes no injustice when I say that for some time
-now Hirst has dismissed, largely through this swerve of his, more of
-the first five or six batsmen than have fallen to his, Wilfred’s, lot.
-
-Of all the really fast amateur bowlers none have given me so much
-pleasure to watch as Sam Woods. At Brighton College they tell me he was
-quite as fast as he ever was afterwards all through his first-class
-career as a bowler. Personally I experienced the same luck as many
-another would-be run-getter who met him for the first time, that is to
-say, I went in to bat and came out again without having heard the sound
-of the bat striking the ball, b. Woods 0! The pace was bewildering. At
-his best and in full health he was as fast as an ordinary player cares
-to encounter. Exceedingly even in temper for a fast bowler, there were
-only one or two little things that really worried him. One, however,
-was to see a man draw away as he came up to the crease with those short
-shuffling strides he always adopted. I shall never forget one day at
-Fenner’s in some trial match a rather nervous performer against fast
-bowling wobbled to the wicket. Sam was bowling _over_ the wicket, and
-the newcomer, who practically relied on a very late cut for scoring
-purposes, promptly planted him for two or three fours through the
-slips, having first withdrawn, at the approach of “the Terror,” in the
-direction of the square leg umpire. The same sliding motion at right
-angles to the wicket, the same stroke, the same lucky four, and Sam
-goes round the wicket. If fast at first, he is faster now, and the
-nervous player is still more nervous. The ball comes down well clear
-of the leg stick, and is cut _behind the wicket and between the wicket
-and the stumper!_—a truly miraculous stroke, and one that I have never
-seen executed save on this solitary occasion. Four! but the next was
-straight, and it crept a bit, and the nervous batsman retired, having,
-however, before his departure credited himself with fifty or so on the
-sunburnt “tins.”
-
-Of W. M. Bradley, there is nothing to be said—a natural fast bowler
-with the mind of a man and the strength of a bull. I faced him two
-years ago at Canterbury. He was bowling against the pavilion and
-against the sun; the slope of the ground went with him, a new ball was
-in his hand, and it whizzed down the pitch as it left it. It was about
-the most uncomfortable ten minutes I ever spent. They came “down the
-vale” with a four-inch off break; they grazed one’s ribs, one’s chest,
-one’s nose; and at last I was caught in the slips protecting my eye
-with my hand. It was on this occasion that I was truly convinced of
-what a grand player Tom Hayward is against really fast bowling. Though
-we were easily beaten, he made 97 not out! Good boy!
-
-There are many more in this our third class that I should like to write
-about, but space and the clock forbid, and so perforce am I compelled
-to halt awhile and wait for the little cavalcade of “lobsters” that
-are so far behind, so very far behind, the pressing throng of modern
-bowlers. To quote from _Wisden_:—
-
- We, the solitary few who still strive to hold upright the tottering
- pillars in the ruined temple of lob bowling, unto whose shrine the
- bowlers of the olden time for ever flocked, to-day we are but of
- small account; there is scarcely a ground in England where derision
- is not our lot, or where laughter and jaunting jeers are not hurled
- broadcast at us. To-day perhaps to an all-powerful side we are of
- little use—to a side that is weak, to a side whose special weakness
- is its fielding, we are the strychnine of tonics. By himself stands
- Simpson-Hayward, for he “flicks” the ball as we have all seen many
- a wrathful billiard-player do when returning the white from a most
- unexpected pocket—it spins and spins and breaks sharply from the
- off, and it sometimes hits the wicket. There are two more, Wynyard
- and myself, and we both bowl in the old, old way, and we bowl with
- a persistence born of tentative success—occasionally we hook a
- fish, and great is our rejoicing. We are both fond of this bowling,
- I particularly so, and when on many a ground throughout the country
- there has arisen on every side the gentle sound of “Take him orf! Take
- him orf!” were it not that the side ever comes before oneself, I would
- bowl, and bowl, and bowl, until at eventide the cows come home.—
-
- D. L. A. J., _Wisden_, 1902.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _C. J. Basébe._
-_KENNINGTON OVAL IN 1849._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER V
-
-FIELDING
-
-By S. L. JESSOP
-
-
-It has become almost an axiom of the game that more matches are lost by
-bad fielding than through any superexcellence of batting or bowling,
-and that this is really the case few will deny.
-
-How many of those favoured mortals who participate in first-class
-cricket can call to mind instances of brilliant batting, followed up
-by capital bowling, all to be rendered null and void by the missing
-of a “sitter” by some lazy fieldsman whose thoughts were anywhere but
-on the game. Cricketers are but mortals, and catches will be missed
-as long as the game of cricket is played, but less mistakes would be
-made, especially in the slips, if fieldsmen would but pay the strictest
-attention to the game, and not allow their thoughts to wander. That
-chance that “Cain” gave to third slip, which might have turned defeat
-into victory, would in all probability have been accepted, had the
-culprit’s thoughts not been too much engrossed in the choice of
-theatres that evening for his fiancée; and to such causes as these,
-if one could but read the thoughts of those at fault, many of the too
-frequent mistakes could be traced. Too much emphasis cannot be attached
-to this lack of attention, for one can but judge from one’s own
-experience.
-
-That fielding, the most important branch of the game, has deteriorated
-during even the past five or six years may be accepted as a true bill,
-and we can only look for improvement to those who have the rising
-generation under their charge. No one can expect to become a good
-fieldsman without assiduous and often irksome practice, and this,
-combined with the undue prominence bestowed on batting, may account
-somewhat for the deterioration. A batsman, by scoring 50 runs, feels
-that he may have had a material hand in the success of his side, and
-in the same way so does a bowler who takes five or six wickets, for
-they both have something tangible to show in the score-sheet. True, the
-fieldsman may have helped the bowler by a brilliant catch or two, but
-there is no record of the amount of runs he may have saved. Thus it is
-that a little selfishness may crop up, for whereas the fieldsman may
-feel that, like the spoke of a wheel, he is only part of a whole, the
-batsman or bowler feels that he is an individual. Be the reason what it
-may, there is no doubt that the practice of fielding is much neglected,
-and as there is not that monotony in it that so frequently crops up
-in batting achievements, it is difficult to understand the cause of
-that neglect. When one considers that the best batsman in the world
-is not absolutely certain of scoring a run, and that a good fieldsman
-nearly always saves 20 or 30, the importance of fielding can at once be
-appreciated.
-
-From a spectacular point of view there is no more stirring sight than
-to see eleven players, each of whom is striving his utmost to outdo
-the other in his efforts to save runs, bringing off catches that an
-ordinary field would not even attempt, and saving runs in a manner
-which at times borders on the miraculous. It is such a sight as this
-that saves cricket from becoming too monotonous. As has been mentioned
-before, sufficient practice is not indulged in; players who take
-great pains to improve their batting look upon fielding in the light
-of a “something” that has to be put up with, and as such only to be
-tolerated. Let these same players take half an hour’s practice every
-day for a month, and they will find an improvement in their fielding
-such as they would have hardly deemed possible. The only feasible way
-of obtaining practice is for some one to hit the ball to you from all
-sorts of distances, varying from 10 yards to 70, as this range will
-include different kinds of chances, from “slip” catches to catches in
-the long field. It is a good plan to use a light bat and hold it in the
-same manner that one would grasp a racquet, as by doing so one is able
-to impart a “cut” to the ball which closely resembles the spin that
-would result from a mis-hit to “cover” or a “snick” in the “slips.”
-Excepting at school, throwing at the wicket is seldom practised, which
-is a great mistake, for many a run has been saved and many a wicket
-taken by the accuracy of a smart return.
-
-In classifying fieldsmen, one can roughly do so by saying that there
-are two kinds, those that field near the wicket and those that field
-in the out-field, and these latter are in the minority. In the same
-manner, fielding may be dissolved into two parts, namely, ground
-fielding and catching. Ground fielding has been brought to a state of
-perfection for which the improvement in the modern cricket-grounds is
-in a large manner responsible. To become a good ground fieldsman one
-must be able to judge the pace of the ball to a nicety; otherwise,
-although one may succeed in stopping it, one will fail to gather the
-ball accurately, and consequently will not save the run. The fieldsman
-who excels is the one who, gathering the ball accurately, returns it to
-the keeper or bowler with one and the same action. The time saved by
-this almost simultaneous action of stopping and returning the ball is
-of immense value to fielders in the long field, not only in the saving
-of singles, but also in the running out of unwary batsmen. When a ball
-is travelling along the ground, the first duty of a fieldsman is if
-possible to get in front of it, drawing the legs close together, so
-that, should the ball through any irregularity in the turf bump over
-the outstretched hands, it will be impeded by the fieldsman’s body. He
-must be equally certain with right or left hand in stopping those hits
-that he cannot get to with both hands, and there may be a time when it
-is absolutely necessary to use his foot in order to save runs. This
-method, useful and indispensable though it may be at times, is, one is
-sorry to say, becoming a little too general. Whenever possible the hand
-should always be used, and only as a desperate last chance should the
-foot be resorted to.
-
-On the perfect grounds that now abound, in nine cases out of ten the
-chance of overtaking a ball that has been only moderately hit is very
-small, but it is worth while to pursue, even with the odds so great
-against one. And one should bear in mind that the quicker one starts in
-that pursuit, the more likely is that boundary to be saved, especially
-as to gauge the decrease in the pace of the ball is a most difficult
-matter. Grounds too must be taken into consideration, for it does
-not follow that a boundary which one might save at Birmingham would
-be saved at Brighton. When you are attempting to save a boundary by
-_pursuing_ the ball, never try to seize the ball too soon, for you are
-only more likely to miss it altogether, and your chase to be rendered
-futile. Even should you succeed in grasping the ball, your effort of
-stooping down and diving forward so upsets your balance that to turn
-round and return the ball without unnecessary loss of time is extremely
-difficult. The method that should be adopted, and one that is more
-likely to meet with success, is for the fieldsman to overtake the ball,
-and when a little in front, or even level with it, to stretch the hand
-out and allow it to roll into the hand.
-
-No matter how accurate one may be in returning a ball, accuracy is
-of little avail unless it be tempered with speed, for even though
-occasionally a man may be given out when the wicket has been hit and
-he has regained his ground, yet the fieldsman will find that it is the
-exception and not the rule. Without speed of return the fieldsman, be
-he ever so certain a catch or brilliant a ground field, will never
-reach a high point of excellence; he will be useful, but not great.
-Even this useful field is not so frequent as he should be.
-
-Opportunities of running men out are often lost by the fieldsman
-becoming flurried, and returning the ball in a haphazard manner to
-whichever end he happens to be near. This is a most fatal mistake,
-and one that has been the cause of allowing many a batsman to proceed
-on his way safely when the reverse should have been the case. When
-an opportunity of running out a man does occur—and these, from the
-fieldsman’s point of view, are too few and far between—the fieldsman
-should determine as to which end he is to return the ball before
-it reaches him. He will then have more time to make certain of the
-accuracy of his aim. Should he be fielding near the wicket, he should
-return to the wicket-keeper at the height of the latter’s chest; if
-from the long field, on the first bounce, but always at the utmost
-speed. A time may come when it is imperative to aim at the stumps, for
-the time occupied in the keeper breaking the wickets may just suffice
-to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt in a close race; but as
-a general rule it is one’s duty to rely on the keeper. The bowler at
-times has to fulfil the duties of a wicket-keeper in receiving the
-return balls, and as he does not possess the protection of gloves, one
-has to consider the question of damaging his fingers. With a bowler who
-is wont to flinch at a fast return, it is wiser in the end to leave the
-wicket entirely to the accuracy of the thrower and the nimbleness of
-the backer-up. Many “run outs” may accrue in this manner which might
-not have come to pass if too much reliance had been placed on the
-bowler. Preventing runs is made much easier by the faculty of being
-able to anticipate the direction of the batsman’s stroke before he has
-actually played the ball, and this capacity is only acquired by most
-careful attention and experience. By being on one’s toes, somewhat in
-the same manner as one would start for a race, it becomes much easier
-to cut off a ball than if one’s foot is placed flat on the ground. The
-adoption of this attitude not only saves actual runs, but it has the
-further advantage of preventing batsmen from attempting those short
-runs which so often have the effect of demoralising a weak fielding
-side. Difficult as it is at times to judge to which end the ball will
-be returned, especially when a fieldsman feints to throw in at one end
-and then suddenly returns it to the other, some one should always be
-backing up both the wicket-keeper and bowler. Nothing is more annoying
-to the bowler than to see a sharp-run single converted into a two or
-even more by the lack of adequate backing-up. It is those who are
-fielding near the wicket who should be responsible for the prevention
-of overthrows, especially the man in that place to which it is usual to
-relegate a weak fieldsman, mid-on.
-
-There is no hard-and-fast rule for the proper position to hold the
-hands when about to receive a catch. The hand should be so held as
-to form a cup, with the fingers extended, and the moment the ball is
-inside, the hand should be allowed to give, in order to minimise the
-impact. For catches in the long field one should thrust the hands up
-as high as one can, so that, if the ball should be fumbled, a chance
-may be left of securing it on a second attempt. One-handed catches
-must be made at times, even in the long field, but whenever possible
-two hands should be used. Confidence is a great factor of success at
-cricket, but even that quality may be overdone, especially in catching.
-To make a comparatively easy catch look difficult, in order to extort
-applause from the crowd, is a most unsportsmanlike act, jeopardising
-as it does the success of a side in order to gain a few moments of
-self-glorification. Fortunate is the side which does not possess one
-of these mountebanks. Catches should be looked upon as timely gifts of
-Providence, and as such not to be lightly treated, for in these days of
-concrete-like wickets chances occur all too infrequently.
-
-[Illustration: _THE CRICKET FIELD AT RUGBY._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _W. J. Bowden._
-_A MATCH IN THE EIGHTIES._]
-
-In no branch of the game is the improvement so marked as it is in
-wicket-keeping, and for this improvement present-day cricketers have
-to thank that prince of wicket-keepers, the Australian, Blackham.
-Before he made his appearance in England, long-stops were looked upon
-as quite as indispensable to a side as the wicket-keeper himself,
-but on his arrival in 1878 the fallacy of that theory was quickly
-demonstrated. Wickets in those days were not quite the perfect wickets
-of to-day, and with Spofforth bowling his fastest and best, the manner
-in which Blackham stood close up to the wicket, and without the aid of
-a long-stop, was looked upon as something approaching the marvellous.
-Magnificent keepers as we have had, since he revolutionised the art of
-wicket-keeping, he is still without an equal.
-
-No one, unless he possesses a natural aptitude for the position, is
-likely to achieve any considerable success, though it is a mistake
-to suppose that a wicket-keeper, like the poet, is born, not made.
-Much can be done by practice, and by studying the methods of the many
-brilliant keepers that abound to-day. Excepting the captain of the
-side, no man is more open to criticism than the wicket-keeper, and in
-nine cases out of ten this criticism tends in the direction of abuse.
-By those who have been unfortunate enough to have been persuaded to
-don the gloves, the difficulties of the position are duly appreciated,
-but unless one has done so, one is hardly able to judge the great
-assistance that a good keeper can render a bowler. Besides his duties
-of stumping, running out, and catching, he is often able to inform
-the bowler as to the weak spots in a batsman’s play, for from his very
-position he can more easily detect them. In the case of a good bowler
-and an equally competent stumper, it is a combination of two heads
-against one, the most valuable combination that a side can possess. The
-confidence that a good keeper inspires in a bowler is only equalled
-by the confidence that one would naturally possess in using one’s own
-billiard-cue. An incompetent wicket-keeper will make a good bowler
-powerless, whilst a good keeper considerably strengthens a weak bowling
-side. A wicket-keeper without a good nerve may be likened to a ship
-without a rudder, for each is practically helpless. The slightest sign
-of flinching would result in an appalling amount of byes and missed
-opportunities. Very rarely indeed is a match concluded without the
-wicket-keeper having played an important part in either the winning
-or the losing of it. He should never lose sight of the ball from the
-moment it is out of the bowler’s hand to the moment it reaches him,
-and above all, he should never snap at the ball. He stands up in a
-stooping posture, with his hands close enough to the bails to allow
-him to remove them in almost the same action as receiving the ball.
-Until the ball has been struck or has passed the bat, he should remain
-stationary, for it is much easier to accurately judge the ball thus
-than when on the move. Necessity compels him at times to jump to this
-or that side, but this should be done before the ball reaches him, in
-order to allow the body to be again stationary when his hands receive
-the ball. In order to run the least chance of injury to the hands,
-especially to the top joints of the fingers, the hands should be held
-at a downward angle, and allowed to “give” with the impact of the
-ball. This “give” should be very slight to slow or medium bowling,
-as the drawing back of the hands after taking a ball, even though
-occupying the slightest fraction of a second, often results in a
-missed opportunity of stumping. Wicket-keepers who are in the habit of
-allowing their hands to “give” considerably are, on account of their
-hands being farther back, invariably better catchers than stumpers.
-This is especially applicable to Board, the Gloucestershire keeper.
-He brings off some most wonderful catches, but from this very habit
-of drawing the hands back too far, he is often unable to outpace the
-batsman when a question of stumping arises. Considering how completely
-a batsman, especially a left-hander, often obscures the sight of the
-ball from the keeper’s view, it is a distinct credit to his skill
-that he is able to perform his duties so ably. How many times has the
-explanation of a dropped catch by cover or mid-off been put down to
-want of a proper sight of the ball; but one rarely hears that excuse
-from the stumper, and yet he, above any of the other fields, has
-a right to use it. To a very fast bowler even the most proficient
-of wicket-keepers should stand back, for he is more likely to make
-catches there than if he stood up. Stumping off fast bowling is of rare
-occurrence, not on account of the pace of the bowling, but because in
-playing it a batsman rarely leaves his crease, and consequently the
-keeper gets few opportunities. The latter’s most difficult duty is the
-taking of balls on the leg side. He rarely gets a clear sight of these,
-and consequently has to rely more or less on guess-work, especially
-to bowling above medium pace. The South African, Halliwell, was quite
-as much at home in keeping on the leg side as he was on the off, and
-frequently used to stump batsmen whilst attempting to glance fast
-bowling to leg. Thankless as the post of wicket-keeping is at times,
-yet from the frequency of his opportunities the wicket-keeper must
-often gain some solace.
-
-Because a fieldsman is a good out-field, it does not follow that he
-will be equally successful in any position nearer the wicket, so that,
-though it may be an excellent plan for a fieldsman to become acquainted
-with other positions in the field, yet, as “use is second habit,” it
-may be wiser for him to make a specialty of that position in which he
-has become accustomed to field. On account of the comparatively little
-movement that it requires, “point” is a much sought after position by
-those players who, either from stress of age or laziness, do not wish
-to indulge in much running or throwing. Such is really not the use
-for which this position was intended, for, from the very fact of its
-being so adjacent to the wicket, it requires extreme attention and
-activity. “Point” should never be farther away from the wicket than 12
-yards, either to slow bowling or fast, and he should always be ready to
-take the place of the stumper whenever the latter, either because of
-the bad return or on account of his zeal in running after a “snick,”
-leaves his post. Many “points” stand too far out, so much so that they
-encroach on the duties of “cover.” If a “point” stands some 16 or 17
-yards away from the wicket, the “cover” must of necessity stand much
-deeper, and by doing so he can rarely stop two determined batsmen from
-stealing many short runs during the course of a long partnership. No
-finer “points” than Noble, and Wright of Derbyshire, who stand rarely
-more than 10 yards from the bat, could be found, and the number of
-catches that they have brought off because of their propinquity to the
-wicket more than counterbalances the number of runs that they might
-have saved by standing back.
-
-There is no position in the field that gives so many opportunities
-for a fine field to shine as does that of “cover-point.” It is a most
-trying position for any one who may not be in the best of condition,
-as he has to be continually on the move, for he it is that is held
-responsible for the prevention of short runs, quite the most arduous
-part of his many duties. As he has a large area of ground to look
-after, he must be very exact in keeping in his right place, as even a
-yard may mean all the difference between taking or missing a chance,
-especially as the ball sometimes travels at great speed in his
-direction. The difficulty of the position lies in the amount of “spin”
-that is often imparted to the ball, not only when on the ground, but
-also when in the air. Catches which often appear to be going to one’s
-right hand have suddenly to be attempted with the left, on account of
-the curve, and this curve being of a very sudden nature, these catches
-are extremely hard to judge. This curve is most pronounced when a slow
-left-hand or a leg-break bowler is bowling. One often sees apparently
-easy catches from mis-hits dropped at “cover” in a most unaccountable
-fashion, but in reality these simple “dolly” catches are much more
-difficult to hold than those from hard drives. An incredible amount of
-“spin” is put on a mis-hit ball, so that, unless the catch is received
-well into the middle of the hand, the spinning ball will act in much
-the same fashion as does a billiard-ball when “check side” is imparted
-to it. When assisted by an extra mid-off, “cover” should place himself
-much squarer with the wickets, as he will have a much less area of
-ground to guard, and he must be just deep enough to be able to save
-singles. He should be able to return the ball from below the shoulder
-with a fast wristy action, full pitch to the wickets. The introduction
-of extra mid-off has somewhat lessened “cover’s” duties, so much so
-that often a brilliant field has very little to do in that position,
-this being especially the case with slow bowling. Naturally, strokes
-off slow bowling are made more in front than behind or square, so that
-to this class of bowling the extra mid-off is indispensable. To see
-Gregory fielding at “cover” is an object-lesson to those fielders who
-may have fallen into the disastrous habit of allowing the ball to come
-to them, instead of dashing in to meet it. There are many admirable
-cover-points, but for many years the Australian has been quite in a
-class by himself in that position.[1]
-
-The duties of “third man” are of the same description as those of
-“cover,” for the position calls for equal activity and dash. Short
-runs are invariably attempted if the “third man” is at all likely to
-be flurried, so that the fieldsman selected for the position must
-essentially be cool and collected. The pace of the wicket and the
-bowling should determine the exact position in which he should stand,
-and he should cultivate a stooping attitude, as the balls come to him
-as a rule very low. He will not get many catches, but when he does, it
-is extremely likely that they will be very difficult, on account of
-the “cut” that the ball will possess from being hit in that direction.
-When a short run is attempted, it is better to return the ball to the
-bowler, as the batsman who is backing up has less ground to cover than
-the striker. Any ball that goes to the left hand of “point” he has to
-attend to, and he must also back up the wicket-keeper when the ball is
-returned from the on side. One of the long fields is generally deputed
-to fill the position, often solely in order to save him from having
-to walk too far in order to fill some other position. Naturally it is
-a wise precaution to avoid tiring your fieldsmen, but unless the long
-field shows a marked aptitude for the position, he should not be placed
-there. Third men that one cannot occasionally steal runs from are very
-rare, but he would be a daring runner who would attempt to do so when
-such brilliant men as Trumper, Sewell, or Burnup are fielding in that
-position.
-
-If one could trace the position of the field in which most catches are
-missed, “the slips,” it would be safe to say, would pan out as the
-chief offenders. Excepting the wicket-keeper’s, theirs are the most
-important places, and require quick-sighted fieldsmen who are certain
-catches. Attention is the most important quality, combined with the
-faculty of being able to judge the flight of the ball from the bat.
-One must adopt a stooping attitude, in order to reach low catches, and
-also because it enables one to spring in any direction with more ease
-than if one stands upright. Though two hands, as in other positions in
-the field, should be used whenever possible, yet one must be certain
-with either hand, as the majority of catches are brought off with one
-hand. Two common faults are pretty general, namely, snapping at the
-ball instead of letting it come into the hand, and standing in the
-wrong place. The distance at which the slips should stand varies very
-much in accordance with the state of the pitch and the nature of the
-bowling. They would naturally be farther back to fast bowling than to
-slow. It is a moot point as to whether a slip should be stationary
-or occasionally on the move, in order to anticipate a stroke. An
-experienced slip has his own method, and he is wise to stick to it
-if he finds it meets with success, even though it be a method not
-altogether orthodox. Of present-day slips individually, R. E. Foster,
-A. O. Jones, Tunnicliffe, J. R. Mason, and Braund stand out very
-prominently, but collectively the combination of Braund, Maclaren, and
-Jones is all that one could desire.
-
-An easy position, but one that requires considerable nerve and
-activity, is “mid-off.” As a rule the ball comes straight to the
-fielder and at great pace, but usually with very little twist on,
-though occasionally, when a left-hander is bowling, the ball swerves
-a good deal. The most difficult catches that he has to deal with are
-those that rise from the very moment that the ball touches the bat,
-and unless he judges the ball very accurately, he will find that the
-tips of his fingers will suffer very considerably, and that success
-will not attend his efforts. “Mid-off” should be in such a position
-as to be able to back up the bowler when the batsman returns the ball
-hard, and also to save short runs. Like “cover” and “third man,” he
-should be always ready to start, as he often gets chances of a run-out.
-The amount of runs that the Australian Jones and Hirst save in that
-position, and the catches that they bring off, are phenomenal.
-
-In all the course of my experience I have never yet seen a really
-first-class “mid-on.” It may be that I have been peculiarly unfortunate
-in that respect. It is an easy position to field in, because the ball
-is not often hit in that direction, and when it is, there is no twist,
-although there may be a good deal of pace on it. On account of the
-easiness of the position, the weak fieldsmen are deposited there. When
-a “short leg” is utilised, “mid-on’s” duties are a perfect sinecure,
-but on fast wickets, when the short leg’s services are dispensed with,
-he has a considerable amount of work to get through. He is often the
-only man fielding on the on side of the wicket, and accordingly he has
-to run for any ball that may be played on that side. He must be ready
-to back up both the wicket-keeper and the bowler, so that a great many
-runs can be saved by a smart field in this position.
-
-On a bad wicket and with an off-break bowler the position of short
-leg is indispensable, as under these conditions many balls, though
-intended to be played straight, hit the edge of the bat and, on account
-of the break, proceed in his direction. Though weak fielders are also
-relegated to this position, it is a difficult post to fill adequately,
-as the ball comes often very quick and low, with a good deal of spin
-on. His position varies a good deal according to the style of the
-batsman, but he should not be too deep. As a general rule, he should
-be about 10 or 11 yards from the batsman. As so much leg-break bowling
-is now in vogue, he often gets bombarded in a dangerous manner. When a
-bowler of this kind is performing, it is just as well to place one of
-the best fieldsmen in that position.
-
-Fielding in the “long field” requires more nerve and judgment than
-does fielding near the wicket. The ball is much longer in the air and
-on the ground, and it is on account of this fact that nerve plays
-such an important part. The ball is so long in coming to the fieldsman
-that he has time to conceive all manner of things that may happen,
-and it is for this reason that the knowledge of the temperaments of
-those playing under him is so useful to the captain. A fieldsman who
-is nervous in the long field need not necessarily be classed as a bad
-field, for cases have come under my own observation of the wonderful
-change that has been wrought in a “nervy” field when fielding close to
-the wickets. Generally speaking, there are two positions in the long
-field, “long on” and “long off,” but now that the fashionable method of
-bowling wide of the leg stump has somewhat superseded the “off theory,”
-the old position of “long leg” has lately been made more use of. In all
-three positions the duties are similar, and they require a safe pair
-of hands, speed in running, and great accuracy in returning the ball.
-Everything in the nature of a chance must be attempted, even at the
-risk of not saving a boundary, for often catches are made that at times
-look impossible. “Long field” must return the ball the moment that it
-is in his hands, and should never wait for the ball to come to him, but
-should dash in the moment it is struck. Few “out-fields” can throw a
-distance of 70 or 80 yards without going through some such preliminary
-as moving the arms round and round in order to gain sufficient momentum
-to aid them in propelling the ball, and even running 2 or 3 yards
-before returning it. This waste of time is simply a sign of lack of
-practice, and can easily be remedied by sufficient attention paid to
-it.
-
-The importance of good fielding cannot be too greatly emphasised, for
-without it a good bowling side is rendered ineffectual and powerless
-to win matches, excepting on bad wickets. Unless a batsman or a
-bowler should possess great proficiency, he should not be included
-in a first-class match if he cannot attain to an average standard
-of fielding; _i.e._ he should be able to throw, not jerk, and catch
-reasonable catches. The time comes when a fieldsman, through advancing
-years, may not be so speedy in the field as he was wont to be in
-his younger days, though his powers as a batsman may be scarcely
-diminished. Provided he is still able to hold catches, in positions
-that require little or no running about, he may still be a powerful
-factor of success to his side. But for young fieldsmen who either from
-sheer laziness or inability cannot either hold catches or save runs,
-one cannot but have a feeling of disgust, and it is such players as
-these that are out of place in first-class cricket.
-
-[Illustration: _KENT_ v. _SUSSEX, AT BRIGHTON._
-_A supposed Match played between 1839-41._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER VI
-
-COUNTY CRICKET
-
-By W. J. FORD
-
-
-It has been always cast in the teeth of us Englishmen by our
-Continental critics that we take our amusements seriously—that our
-idea of recreation is to go forth and kill something, and that anything
-of the nature of excitement is unknown to us; even our wars seem to
-them to be conducted by us in a cold-blooded, business-like, almost
-saturnine fashion, such as the foreigner cannot understand. Our almost
-fanatical excitement over the relief of Mafeking and of Ladysmith might
-have served to disenlighten our neighbours to a certain degree, but
-they probably regarded those wild bursts of enthusiasm as a mere phase
-of a fever, as one of the periodic alternations of heat and cold that
-are characteristic of a severe attack of ague. It is for the historian
-and the student of human nature to decide whether our nature is
-phlegmatic or merely proud, and whether these rare outbursts are not in
-reality a genuine eruption of violent volcanic feelings which have long
-smouldered beneath the crust of our real nature. The true account seems
-to be that in matters of a public and, still more, of an international
-character, insular pride does not allow us to reveal the fact that the
-Englishman possesses a certain amount of that excitability which we
-choose to attribute to the southern and the Latin races: it is only a
-special stress that reveals this side of our nature. When, however,
-the Englishman’s foot is on English soil, and when his only critics
-are of the same blood as himself, then and only then does he allow
-the true keenness of his disposition to run riot. The Englishman, in
-short, only casts aside his phlegm, his reserve, and his pride when
-he is in congenial society, and the presence of the necessary society
-is in no place more apparent than on the scenes of those sports that
-afford him the amusement and, in some cases, the means of life. Those
-scenes may be narrowed down to the football field, the race-course, and
-the cricket ground. It is with the last of these that our business at
-present lies.
-
-It would be impossible to lay down any cast-iron reason for the fact
-that general interest in cricket has increased by leaps and bounds
-in the last twenty years. The fact is incontrovertible, whatever the
-cause may be, but to most of those who have watched the course of
-cricket events, the progress of county cricket will present itself as
-the primary cause of the progress of the game as a whole. At the same
-time, there is a fair field left for those who choose to maintain that
-the impetus given to county cricket is really due to the rapid spread
-of the game itself and the attendant enthusiasm of its admirers; while
-there is, as usual, a third course left to us, which is to maintain
-that the two things, general cricket and county cricket, have advanced
-_pari passu_, each owing much to the other. And at this point we may
-abandon the question as one that will produce abundant controversy and
-no conviction, especially as all the theorists can meet and agree as
-to the one common effect, differ as they may as to the cause, namely,
-that both players of the game and lovers of the game have increased by
-innumerable multiples during the last fifteen or twenty years. There
-are those who think it good to decry this desperate enthusiasm for a
-pastime—who declare that it is a symptom of national decadence, and
-declare that a mere game is an irrational thing, inasmuch as a rational
-treatment of it at once destroys its existence as a game in the true
-sense of the word. We are hardly prepared, however, to have our
-pastimes handled in this Socratic manner. A game is a game, and if it
-is a good game, we who love it consider that it deserves something more
-than casual and ephemeral treatment; hence we throw ourselves into it
-heart and soul, and those who like to see heart-and-soul work have only
-to go to the nearest county ground on a match day to see how energy
-and rivalry can, on the principle enunciated above, turn a game into a
-no-game.
-
-Nor is it illogical at this point to assume that county cricket is to
-us the highest popular embodiment of our pastime; it is true that a
-certain and a limited number of special matches attract more attention,
-for sentimental reasons, than do mere county matches, but it is on
-the latter class of games that genuine and general interest is mainly
-expended, earning for those who exhibit it a certain amount of contempt
-from those who hold that to lavish interest on a game is to squander
-a valuable asset. Political economy and its votaries would doubtless
-tell us—indeed, they do tell us—that such labour as is expended on
-hitting, or on bowling, or on stopping, or on catching a mere ball,
-is unproductive labour, and consequently labour lost, while they show
-no limit to their contempt for those who, not being actual players
-themselves, squander—so they call it—valuable time in watching other
-people waste time that is equally valuable. However, the cynic and his
-butt, like the poor, are always with us; all that we can desire and all
-that we can hope for is that he will confine himself to his dwelling,
-and leave us to enjoy ourselves in peace, while we may fairly ask him
-to reflect in the recesses of his barrel as to what the watchers of
-cricket would do with themselves if there were no cricket to watch.
-That they would be better employed is possible; that they would be
-worse employed is probable; and he would be a poor philosopher indeed
-who would find fault with the open-air stage of Lord’s or the Oval,
-and would yet allow the music-hall and the theatre to stifle their
-nightly victims. The strictest of Puritans could hardly find fault with
-bat and ball as being the inculcators of evil principles; rather, like
-the study of the ingenuous arts, do they “soften our characters and
-forbid them to be savage.” The cynic and the rhymer have had their say,
-but cricket is still with us, and seems likely to stay, howl as they
-will.
-
-In connection with the game’s advance, it would be unjust not to
-acknowledge the fillip that has been given to it by the periodical
-visits of Australian elevens, the first of which occurred as far
-back as 1878, combined with the return of their calls by our men. It
-was a new truth to us that there was growing up in Greater Britain a
-race of men who, taught by ourselves, profiting by our lessons, and
-in the process of time perhaps improving on our methods, were able
-to withstand us to our face, the pupil often proving the superior
-of the master; and it may be that to this fact, and the perhaps
-unconscious conviction that “the old man” must not be “beaten by the
-boy” at cricket as at chess, is due the uprise of county cricket as
-the readiest means of ascertaining our strength and organising our
-resources, though it was not till several years after the first visit
-of Australians that any real attempt to organise county cricket into
-a formal competition succeeded. Such an attempt had been made in 1872
-by the Marylebone Cricket Club, which offered a cup in that year for
-competition among the counties, but the offer was coldly received, the
-counties that entered were so few that such words as “competition” and
-“championship” became misnomers, and the offer was withdrawn. Not that
-the word “champion” had not been and still was applied to some county
-or another as soon as the last ball of the season had been bowled, but
-the expression was visionary; it was merely the outcome of the views
-of the press or of individuals, and it naturally happened that when
-these views conflicted there were “two Richmonds in the field,” both
-styled champion by their respective supporters. It was not till the
-representatives of counties met in peaceful conclave, coded laws and
-bye-laws, with the request that the M.C.C. would exercise a fatherly
-and presidential rule over county cricket, that the latter became
-historical fact.
-
-It seems to me that the growth and systematization of general cricket
-are due to the growth and systematization of county cricket, and the
-emulation which accompanied its increase. The counties, having set
-their hands to the plough, were in no mood to look back; those which,
-as exceptionally strong, were rated first-rate, set themselves to see
-that no weakness on their part should cause them to be degraded to the
-ranks; while the rank and file, on the other hand, spared no effort
-to secure their own promotion. And at this point it is well to remind
-those who profess to see a mere desire of money-making underlying the
-expansion of county cricket, that the then junior counties, many of
-which are now seniors, owed their existence and its prolongation not
-to gate-money or speculating syndicates, as is the case with many
-football clubs, but to the generous assistance of enthusiastic patrons,
-whose only motive for liberality was their own love of the game, as a
-game, and their desire to see it not merely extended, but perfected.
-At the present day there are county clubs which rely mainly for their
-existence on the voluntary subscriptions and donations of their
-supporters, men whose only reward is the opportunity of seeing good
-cricket brought home to their own doors, and the promotion, expansion,
-and improvement of the game. Gate-money is of course an important
-factor in a club’s receipts, but it is sheer nonsense, it is almost
-mendacity, to declare that the county cricket of to-day is played for
-gate-money and for nothing else. Yet such assertions have been made,
-and are still made, by men who do not reflect that the patrons who
-subscribe to a club do not do so with the idea of providing the public
-with a gratis entertainment, though—I am thinking of one patron in
-particular—such an act would not be without precedent: their idea is,
-as stated before, to provide amusement for themselves, encourage the
-game, and help those who help themselves. The last people to grumble at
-the payment of gate-money are the payers themselves, who are not slow
-to recognise that sixpence is not a large sum to expend for a day in
-the open air, with a display of skill and activity thrown in, for which
-the spectator pays at the rate of about one penny per hour! Lastly,
-and briefly—for there is no satisfaction gained by dealing with
-misstatements—when accounts are balanced, the surplus that remains,
-if any, does not go to swell the speculator’s income, but is devoted to
-the improvement of accommodation, the advancement of the game, or that
-prudent economy that provides against the cricketer’s bugbear, in every
-sense of the word—a rainy day.
-
-I have suggested that we owe the increase of cricket to the growth
-of county cricket, and the reasons are not far to seek. When once a
-county is included in the first class, or aspires to it, its first
-effort is to enlist all its available talent, and as the reward of the
-great cricketer is no mean one, whether that reward come in the shape
-of reputation and amusement to the amateur, or of good red gold to the
-professional, the aim and ambition of every promising player and of the
-club to which he belongs is to get at least a fair trial in the higher
-spheres of the game. Further than that, the executive does not merely
-wait to receive the applications of the ambitious, but, like Porsena
-of Clusium, it “bids its messengers ride forth, east and west and
-south and north,” not exactly “to summon its array,” but to ascertain
-what fighting blood there is in the county ready for immediate action,
-and what recruits there are whose early promise may be developed into
-disciplined effectiveness. In other words, the cricketing pulse of
-the county at once begins to throb, and the executive, like a wise
-physician, keeps its finger on that organ, to ascertain the condition
-of the patient. But it is not merely by inquisition into the talent
-that is available that the ranks of a county eleven are filled up:
-the promising players are invited to attend at the county ground for
-inspection, practice, and tuition, being drafted into the company of
-the “ground” bowlers, and given opportunities in minor matches of
-exhibiting their natural and their trained powers, a further impulse
-being given to cricket by the distribution of the big matches among
-different centres, where such distribution is possible, and by the
-mission of so-called second elevens to the most distant bounds, to
-play matches and to discover talent. These trips may well be compared
-to the marches of different regiments through those districts from
-which, under the territorial system, they hope to draw their recruits.
-When to these different forms of encouragement we add the sums spent
-in occasional subsidies, to say nothing of the salaries of players and
-officials, and of the expenses entailed by the upkeep of the club’s
-ground and property, it will be seen that, though the sour may sneer,
-it would be and is impossible for a crack county to maintain its
-position unless its assured income from subscriptions were augmented
-by the humble sixpence of gate-money. It is not, of course, every
-county that can manage its cricket _en prince_ in the way indicated:
-that implies a heavy rent-roll, a handsome and dependable income, and
-perhaps a snug little sum in the 2-3/4 per cents; only rich counties
-can do things with a lavish hand, and find themselves able to spare
-a lucrative match that will produce a bouncing benefit for some
-deserving professional. Others have to look rather wistfully at the
-small roll of cloth from which their coat has to be cut, and have to
-curtail expenses accordingly; but the county cricket club, even if run
-upon humble lines, recollects that Rome was not completed within the
-twenty-four hours, and that as nothing succeeds like success, its first
-and primary duty is to be successful, if possible; that it is only by
-pains and patience that the best men are to be discovered and utilised,
-and that its turn can only be served by inoculating as many people and
-clubs as possible with the most virulent type of cricket fever.
-
-I am disposed to think that that county is likely to prosper which
-can find two or three grounds within its borders which are suitable
-for county cricket, and are in the centre of fairly populous
-districts; to which fact I attribute, in no small degree, the success
-of the Yorkshire County C.C. as an institution, and of its eleven
-as a fighting body. Not that the side has always had the pleasant
-experiences of 1900, 1901, and 1902, when in a series of eighty-three
-matches only two resulted in failure, for as recently as 1889 the big
-county and Sussex met at the fag-end of the season in an encounter
-which was to decide whether the northern or the southern county was
-to find its name at the bottom of the roll; but the county of so
-many acres has not only a large field of selection, but has also, in
-Sheffield, Leeds, Huddersfield, Bradford, Scarborough, York, Hull, and
-Dewsbury, so many centres of action that she can display her powers to
-tens of thousands, where other counties can only muster thousands, and
-can thus command a very large and consistent income. But in strict
-and strong relief stands out the figure of Nottingham, a county that,
-to the best of my knowledge, has never played a “home” match away from
-the Trent Bridge ground, and has never been blest with a superabundance
-of this world’s goods, yet has for many years not only possessed a
-formidable eleven of its own, but has also been able to send out a full
-and steady stream of professional players of all classes, some of whom,
-though not exactly thankless children, have proved a veritable set of
-serpent’s teeth when arrayed against the mother county. Nottinghamshire
-is a standing exception to the rule that great elevens are the outcome
-of great incomes.
-
-There is no doubt that the true nucleus of a county eleven lies in the
-body of professional players that the executive has at its disposal.
-As men who are in receipt of a definite wage for their services, and
-as men who, by reason of their skill, obedience, and civility, have
-something like a right to expect a benefit match after some ten or
-twelve years of service, they find it a duty as well as a pleasure
-to keep themselves in good condition as well as in good practice,
-and, their services being always available, they are in the long run
-of more general use than the amateurs, many of whom, having other
-avocations, are unable to play regularly. Not that any eleven is
-complete without its amateurs. Among professionals a certain amount
-of professional jealousy is sure to arise, which sometimes grows into
-something stronger; while it has been proved by actual experience
-that in an eleven entirely composed of paid players, and of course
-captained by a professional, difficulties of discipline will occur,
-the management of the eleven being acridly criticised by those who
-think that in some form or other their abilities have not been duly
-recognised, which lack of recognition is attributable to the worst and
-meanest of motives. There is no such thing, fortunately, as a cricket
-trade-union, nor is there any place for it, but as a matter of history
-it is right to record that various secessions, almost amounting to
-mutinies, have occurred in the professional ranks at different times,
-which have sometimes taken the form of a strike, based either on a
-claim for higher pay, or on a demand that certain players who are
-regarded as obnoxious—almost as blacklegs—by their comrades should
-not take part in a given match, under no less a penalty than the
-refusal of the protestants to appear themselves. All these things have
-occurred, but just as the intestine disputes of bees may, according
-to Virgil, be allayed by the flinging down of a handful of dust, so
-a little diplomatic negotiation has settled the dispute. But nothing
-tends so much to bind a team together in the bonds of amity as well
-as of discipline as the presence of capable amateurs—men of tact
-and education as well as efficient cricketers, one of whom, acting
-as captain and supreme controller, can readily check the earlier
-symptoms of discontent, or, better still, by his wise administration
-of his office prevent the incubation of a disease so disastrous as
-indiscipline. The moral effect of the presence of amateurs is no whit
-less than their value as players, preventing as it does the somewhat
-sordid troubles that are apt to arise among those to whom cricket
-is a livelihood, and not merely a pastime. Further, a great deal
-has been said and written—mainly by those who know nothing of the
-subject—as to the exact relations existing between the amateur and
-the professional. Only ignorance permits a man to apply such a word
-as “snobbish” to the custom of providing separate accommodation for
-the two classes of players; worse is it when such a one hints at such
-a thing as stand-offishness on the part of the amateurs. There are
-certain differences in the education and the social position of the two
-classes that makes the closer intimacy of the pavilion undesirable, and
-undesired also by both parties. At any rate, cricketers are perfectly
-capable of making all such arrangements for themselves, without
-the intrusion and interference of others. They have their own code
-and their own method, nor does there exist any analogy between the
-regulations, especially as to the amateur _status_, of cricket and of
-other games. Cricket stands on its own pedestal, and it is good that it
-should.
-
-[Illustration: _A CRICKET MATCH (about 1750)._]
-
-One of the troublous parts of cricket legislation has been the question
-of the residential qualification of cricketers for their counties,
-and the manner of defining what _bona fide_ residence is. It has been
-always recognised, I believe, that a man may play for the county in
-which he was born, or for the county in which he resides, though for
-“or” might have been written “and” as recently as 1873. Up to that
-date a man might, and many men did, play for two counties in one
-and the same season, under the two qualifications, while it was an
-understood thing that when those two counties met he represented the
-county of his birth. There were, however, obvious objections to this
-dual license, though they only first took shape in the form of proposed
-regulation in 1868. Five years later it was made law that a man who was
-doubly qualified must elect at the beginning of each season to play
-for one of these counties, and for no other. It was undoubtedly an
-abuse that such a state of things should exist, but it must have been
-a convenient source of revenue to a few professionals in the days when
-fees were low and matches few. But the accurate definition of _bona
-fide_ residence is still a difficulty: in some cases a man has taken
-a room, or a room has been taken for him, in the county for which he
-is desired to qualify, and he has, as occasion suited, occupied it
-for a night or two, while similar evasions or elastic interpretations
-of the law have existed; but the present solution of the question
-is probably the best one, _i.e._ to fall back on the patient and
-ever-willing committee of the M.C.C., which consents to adjudicate on
-all such questions as they arise. It should be added that proposals
-have been made several times, notably by Lord Harris in 1880, that
-the residential period should be reduced to one year; but though this
-reduction would have acted well in certain cases, especially in those
-of Colonial and army players who took up their residence in England,
-it has been held that objections outweigh the advantages, and the tale
-of years has not been reduced.
-
-Some men consider that only the qualification of birth should be
-considered, so that only natives of a county should represent it;
-but, after all, this qualification is a mere accident as far as the
-individual himself is concerned; it would act hardly on a man born
-in a poor county—poor, that is, as a cricket-playing county; it
-would condemn many a first-class player to take little or no part in
-first-class cricket, which is the same thing as county cricket, and we
-might even have the anomaly of a county desiring, owing to its plethora
-of great players, to put two teams into the competition. As long as
-one county does not attempt to lure away men from its neighbours, as
-long as every club keeps its eyes wide open in its quest for its own
-young blood, and as long as every man feels that it is a primary duty
-to keep his allegiance to his native county, so long will the present
-rule be thoroughly satisfactory, and the “sporting spirit” must be
-trusted to see that the unwritten laws are not transgressed. At the
-same time, a hard case may readily be stated, the case of the man of
-true and tried merit, who has only the prospect of a small income and
-a small benefit as the reward his birth-county can give him, while
-by naturalising himself with its neighbour he may look for a large
-pecuniary reward. As a general rule, however, the present system works
-well: useful men are sometimes overlooked, and allowed, so to speak,
-to take foreign service as soldiers of fortune, but as the process is
-largely reciprocal, it reacts, to some extent, on all counties alike.
-To Yorkshire, and I believe to Yorkshire alone, belongs the credit of
-having been represented for many years by Yorkshiremen alone; but then
-Yorkshire is a very big land.
-
-[Illustration: _A CURIOUS COUNTY CLUB ADVERTISEMENT._]
-
-[Illustration]
-
-As soon as cricket became a part and parcel of English sporting life,
-the contesting sides naturally ranged themselves, in some cases at
-least, under the political subdivisions of England, viz. the counties,
-and consequently we find county cricket existing in a form as far back
-as 1730, when “a great match was played on Richmond Green, between
-Surrey and Middlesex, which was won by the former” (I quote from T.
-Waghorn’s _Cricket Scores_). It is interesting, by the way, to note
-that two of the keenest rivals of to-day met in friendly combat some
-130 years before Middlesex could boast of a county club, while the
-Surrey Club did not really come into existence till 1845. It may be
-added that Middlesex had its revenge three years later, _i.e._ in 1733,
-and that the then Prince of Wales, a great patron of cricket, was so
-pleased with the skill and zeal of the players, that he presented them
-with a guinea apiece. Organisation, classification, championships,
-and all the paraphernalia of modern county cricket did not exist,
-of course, in the times when locomotion was difficult and matches
-consequently few, except among near neighbours; but it may not, on
-the whole, have been bad for cricket that at the outset many matches
-were made for money, and that all contests of importance were vehicles
-for universal and heavy betting. It may seem heterodox to approve of
-wagers and stakes, when nowadays it is the pride of those interested in
-cricket that it rises above such things, but it must not be forgotten
-that customs change with the times; that betting was universal in the
-eighteenth century and the early part of the nineteenth among all men
-who wished to be considered “smart”; and also that, but for the support
-and encouragement given to the game by “sportsmen” and “Corinthians,”
-it would never have flourished in the fashion in which it flourishes
-to-day: indeed, there was nothing more absurd in Kent playing Hampshire
-for 500 guineas, than that the representatives of the two counties
-should fight a main of cocks for the same sum. We naturally find
-certain abuses which are due to the betting system, but on the whole,
-it kept the game alive, and soon quickened it into a more vigorous
-existence. Money had to be found somehow; gate-money was out of the
-question in the days when most matches, even the very greatest, were
-played on village greens or open commons; hence the natural sequence
-that in the men who found the stakes and laid the wagers cricket
-found its best and keenest patrons. To the love of betting we may
-probably attribute the formation of various matches in which curious
-combinations of numbers were made, or when certain men were played as
-“given” men, so that the strength of the contending parties might be
-equalised. Who, however, would care to go nowadays to see twenty-two
-of Surrey play twenty-two of Middlesex, a game that took place in
-1802, and again in 1803? In 1797 we find that England played against
-_thirty-three_ of Norfolk, and won in a single innings by 14 runs.
-Again, in 1800, twelve of England play nineteen of Kent, and we find
-about this period such matches as “Middlesex, with two of Berkshire and
-one of Kent _v._ Essex, with two ‘given’ men”; but a special interest
-attaches to this match, as being the first ever played on Lord’s
-ground, the old “Lord’s” of Dorset Square, in 1787. Perhaps it is not
-unfair to conjecture that the original match was to be between the two
-counties, but that the sides had to be patched up owing to defections.
-It seems hardly probable that monetary or other reasons would prompt
-such curious combinations of men and counties. Proper qualification
-can hardly have been insisted upon; indeed, we find that the famous
-Hambledon Club, practically Hampshire county, was largely composed of
-Surrey men who received enthusiastic invitations to visit the famous
-Broad Halfpenny Down. Harking back to some stray scraps of historical
-interest, we read that in 1739 Kent, “the unconquerable county,” played
-England in the presence of 1000 spectators, but the match ended in a
-fiasco, owing to disputes; indeed, such terminations were not very
-uncommon when party feeling ran high and betting was rampant. In 1746
-Kent again plays England, and wins by a short neck, _i.e._ by one
-wicket, while Sussex and Surrey seem great rivals; Surrey, indeed,
-beats England three years later, and in 1750 loses to Kent by 3 runs,
-but wins the return by nine wickets. From the names quoted, it is
-evident that cricket flourished in the south rather than in the north;
-but cricket was not unknown in the big manufacturing shires, for we
-find that Manchester and Liverpool were then, as now, desperate rivals,
-as were Sheffield and Nottingham. Sheffield, indeed, was so strong that
-it could play, and used to play, the rest of Yorkshire single-handed.
-In a note to a match played between Hants and England in 1772, we find
-that “Lumpy,” for England, bowled out Small, “which thing had not
-happened for some years”! Perhaps “Lumpy” had secured one of those
-wickets on which he could bowl—
-
- For honest Lumpy did allow
- He ne’er could bowl but o’er a brow.
-
-Hence if the wicket had a “brow,” and Lumpy pitched one of his
-“shooters” on it, Small’s downfall is not remarkable. However, though
-Hambledon was the best club and Hants the best county, England was too
-strong to be tackled single-handed. Surrey first met Kent in 1772,
-and beat the county of cherries and hops, having previously done the
-same for Hants, though in the latter case the nuisance of “given men”
-crops up on both sides; yet such games were clearly popular, strength
-being thereby equalised, for we find numerous matches between Hambledon
-and England in which the former club was supported by the presence of
-outsiders. However, the Hambledon Club, “the cradle of cricket,” with
-its “ale that would flare like turpentine”—what a use to put good
-“October” to!—“a viand (for it was more than liquor)” that was “vended
-at 2d. per pint,” collapsed towards the end of the century, and it
-was many a long year before Hants became great again. Alas, too, for
-Hambledon cricketers! They were not content to play cricket for love
-or for glory, but for stakes, the stakes being pints, doubtless of the
-famous “viand”!
-
-A few stray notes on the early half of the century may be not
-inappropriate, and most interesting seem to be the trio of matches
-played between England and Sussex in 1826. No such contest had ever
-taken place before, and the series was really arranged to test
-the relative merits of underhand bowling and the then new-fangled
-roundhand. The results may be regarded as conclusive. Not only did
-Sussex win the first match by seven wickets and the second by three
-wickets, but the third match was lost by the county by as few as 24
-runs. More conclusive was the action of nine of the professionals,
-who refused, after the second match was over, to play in the third
-game, “unless the Sussex bowlers bowl fair—that is, abstain from
-throwing.” The triumph of the new style was complete, though five of
-the recalcitrants played in the third match after all. It was in the
-Kent-Sussex match of this year, Kent having some given men, that wides
-were first counted, though they did not appear as a separate item.
-Three years later no-balls received a similar distinction, the match
-being, nominally, between Middlesex and the M.C.C.; but the county had
-no regular organisation till five-and-thirty years later. Indeed, it is
-illustrative of the then condition of some so-called “county elevens,”
-that “Yorkshire” plays the Sheffield Wednesday C.C. and is beaten in
-1830, while in 1832 Sheffield plays twenty-two of Yorkshire! However,
-in 1834 an eleven, called Yorkshire, consisting mainly of Sheffielders,
-lost to Norfolk by no less than 272 runs, Fuller Pilch contributing
-87 not out and 73; yet Pilch was a Suffolk man, who was eventually
-induced to settle in Kent, though in this year he played for England
-and against Kent, which at this time was easily the strongest county.
-Next year Yorkshire had its revenge on Norfolk, as, though Pilch made
-153 not out in the second innings, the Norfolk men surrendered, the
-game being hopeless, probably to avoid the necessity of coming up on
-the third day.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _G. F. Watts, R.A._
-_THE BATSMAN._
-(_Fuller Pilch_).]
-
-It is unnecessary to dive more deeply into dates, figures, and facts,
-beyond the important fact that early in the last century there were
-many counties that played cricket between themselves, and in certain
-cases could challenge the rest of England, though they did not exist
-as regularly organised societies. The matches were arranged by the
-patrons of cricket, as an exciting form of contest in which money
-was to be won or lost by betting, and with a view to the increase of
-the excitement, men were given to one side or barred from another,
-or else extra numbers were allowed as a counterpoise to extra skill,
-till in due course counties began to exist as organisations of
-themselves, with a view to county cricket pure and simple. Their
-establishment, however, was a matter of time. Sussex led the way in
-1839; Kent seems to have followed the lead in 1842, the year when the
-first Canterbury “Week” was held, under similar conditions to those
-that now exist; while the year 1845 saw the birth of the Surrey Club,
-with the Oval as its cradle. Then came a gap, but in the ‘sixties
-county clubs sprang rapidly into existence—Notts in 1859 or 1860,
-Yorkshire in 1862, Hants in 1863 (though the club collapsed early,
-and was resuscitated in 1874). Middlesex saw the light in 1864, and
-so did Lancashire. Leicestershire dates back to 1878, Derbyshire to
-1870, while Gloucestershire is only a year younger, being followed by
-Somerset in 1875, by Essex in 1876, and by Warwickshire in 1882. With
-the appearance of Worcestershire on the scene in 1899, at least as a
-first-class county, we have reached the last-joined of the present big
-cricketing counties; but it should be clearly understood that the dates
-given are as a rule only those of the years in which the clubs were
-originally formed. Their pretensions to be included in the privileged
-list of those who are entitled, as being “first-class,” to take part
-in the championship competition were only gratified when they had by
-active service and doughty deeds established a claim to promotion.
-
-The formation of county clubs, especially in the middle of last
-century, may fairly be traced directly to the success, in finance as
-well as in cricket, of those famous organisations, the All England
-and the United All England elevens. Originally founded as purely
-financial speculations, for the promotion and success of which the
-best cricketing talent of the country was enlisted, they made annual
-progresses through England, meeting the picked local talent of all
-cricketing centres, generally reinforced by imported men, and meeting
-each other at Lord’s on Whit-Monday, this last match being regarded as
-at least the equal of the Gentlemen and Players fixture as a display of
-scientific cricket. The periodical visits of these skilled _troupes_
-not only excited the interest and improved the cricket of the local
-centres—Dr. Grace himself bears ample testimony to the keenness caused
-by their presence—but they also opened the eyes of cricket-lovers to
-the fact that good cricket could be made self-supporting. Further, they
-saw the immense progress that the game would make, and the enormous
-facilities that would be offered to that progress, in every county
-which had a club and a centre of its own. It may be said, indeed,
-that the success of these peripatetic teams, while it conduced to
-their own collapse, suggested and promoted the foundation of county
-cricket as it is played nowadays. The two great elevens did their work
-well and thoroughly, both for themselves and for the game, and when
-they dispersed, and their constituent members were drafted into the
-county elevens, they could at least claim that they had popularised
-the game, had improved the methods in which it was played, and had
-left behind them a valuable legacy to all those who either played or
-admired cricket. Think of this, all of you who are apt to remember only
-the pettinesses and schisms of those two great elevens! There were
-pettinesses, and there were schisms, but these must be forgotten in the
-recollection that the men who erred were likewise the men who put our
-first-class cricket on its present basis, who made the existence of
-county cricket feasible, possible, and profitable.
-
-It should here be noted that though only fifteen counties have been
-enumerated, the cricket-playing counties are by no means restricted to
-that number. Norfolk and Suffolk have for many years been cricketing
-counties. Cambridgeshire was at one time, thanks to Hayward, Carpenter,
-and Tarrant, one of the strongest of counties. Northamptonshire,
-Durham, Northumberland, Lincolnshire, and many others, _quos nunc
-perscribere longum est_, have all fostered cricket and cricketers,
-and if they have not come into the forefront of the battle yet, there
-is no reason why they should not yet figure as champions, considering
-the vigour and keenness with which the game is played and watched.
-In fact, the question of classification is an extremely hard one,
-the uncertainty of cricket and the part that luck plays adding most
-materially to the difficulties. By the present system the general
-results pan out pretty well, and harmonise, as a rule, with public
-opinion, but accurate organisation and registration, with due regard
-to merit, is impossible in a game at which such curious results
-are possible as were seen in the Yorkshire-Somerset match of 1901.
-Yorkshire, undefeated, was at the head of the list then, as at the
-end of the year. Somerset, at the time the match was played, had won
-but one match out of eight; further, the game in question was played
-on Yorkshire territory, and Somerset, dismissed for 97, was headed
-on the first innings by 238 runs. In the end, Somerset won by 279!
-Who can classify, who promote, who degrade, when such extraordinary
-fluctuations are possible? It is clearly no solution of the promotion
-question to suggest that the lowest of the first-class counties should
-play the highest of the minor counties, the first-class certificate
-being the stake. Nor are matters facilitated when we remember that,
-for financial and other reasons, the minor counties contend in a
-competition in which only two days are allotted to a match instead of
-three. Doubtless public opinion, _i.e._ the opinion of the players who
-are before the public, offered the best solution of the difficulty of
-promotion by co-opting Worcestershire into their ranks, the formality
-being of the simplest nature; for Worcestershire, the fresh claimant
-for the highest honours, simply announced at the Counties’ meeting
-that they had arranged to play the minimum number of matches that
-qualify for the first class with the requisite number of counties.
-The first-class counties co-opted Worcestershire; arbitration and
-adjudication were unnecessary.
-
-In the infancy of county cricket the meetings of the different
-clubs were arranged by a sort of process which we may appropriately
-describe as natural selection. What could be more natural than the
-rivalry between the great professional sides—I am writing of the
-‘seventies—of Yorkshire and Nottingham, and of both with Lancashire,
-and of the amateur elevens of Middlesex and Gloucestershire?
-Geographical convenience brought certain counties into close contact,
-and pre-eminent strength tempted others to ignore all difficulties,
-geographical and sentimental, and to fight the good fight to the
-bitter end. All things, indeed, seemed to be working up for some form
-of county competition, when the M.C.C., in 1872, offered a challenge
-cup to be held by the leading county of the year. The conditions, put
-in an abbreviated form, were that a certain number of counties, not
-exceeding six, were to be selected by the M.C.C. as the competitors;
-that the matches were to be played at Lord’s, and apparently on the
-“knock-out” principle; in the event of a draw, the match was to be
-replayed; the cup to be retained by any county that could win it three
-years in succession. The competition, however, fell through, several
-of the counties withdrawing their entries, and the Marylebone Club
-consequently withdrawing its offer. Kent, however, played Sussex at
-Lord’s for perhaps the only time, and on “dangerously rough wickets,”
-Kent winning by 52 runs.
-
-It is not possible to give a list of champion counties that is
-absolutely accurate, as, until the competition was regulated by proper
-laws, and a recognised system of scoring points existed, the champions
-were selected partly by popular opinion, partly by the written opinions
-of the press, the two often differing, especially when party feeling
-ran high. In the following list, however, the opinion expressed by Dr.
-W. G. Grace in his _Cricket_ has generally been regarded as paramount,
-and few will venture to dispute his authority.
-
-
-CHAMPION COUNTIES, 1864-1901
-
- 1864. Surrey. 1883. Yorkshire.
- 1865. Notts. 1884. Notts.
- 1866. Middlesex. 1885. Notts.
- 1867. Yorkshire. 1886. Notts.
- 1868. Yorkshire. 1887. Surrey.
- 1869. Notts. 1888. Surrey.
- 1870. Yorkshire. { Notts }
- 1871. Notts. 1889. { Lancashire } equal.
- 1872. Surrey. { Surrey }
- { Gloucestershire } 1890. Surrey.
- 1873. { Notts } equal. 1891. Surrey.
- 1874. Gloucestershire. 1892. Surrey.
- 1875. Notts. 1893. Yorkshire.
- 1876. Gloucestershire. 1894. Surrey.
- 1877. Gloucestershire. 1895. Surrey.
- 1878. Notts. 1896. Yorkshire.
- { Lancashire } 1897. Lancashire.
- 1879. { Notts } equal. 1898. Yorkshire.
- 1880. Notts. 1899. Surrey.
- 1881. Lancashire. 1900. Yorkshire.
- { Lancashire } 1901. Yorkshire.
- 1882. { Notts } equal. 1902. Yorkshire.
-
-Thus in the last thirty-eight years, if we reckon in the occasions when
-two or more counties have tied for the first place, we find that the
-championship has been held by Nottinghamshire thirteen times, by Surrey
-eleven times, by Yorkshire ten times, by Lancashire five times, by
-Gloucestershire four times, and by Middlesex once. Sussex did not lose
-a match in 1871, but only played its neighbours of Kent and Surrey,
-in a year when the three northern counties were particularly strong.
-The above list is of course given for what it is worth, but may be
-regarded as fairly accurate, though the conditions and the methods of
-calculation have differed so widely at various periods. Up to 1888, no
-special system for reckoning the “order” seems to have obtained, the
-results being practically arrived at “by inspection”; in that year and
-in 1889 the proportion of wins to the matches played was the accepted
-process, losses being ignored, and drawn games counting half a point,
-so that Notts, with nine wins and three draws in fourteen games, tied
-with Surrey and Lancashire, both of which had ten wins and one draw,
-ten points and a half, in the same number of matches. Next year, and
-till 1895, defeats were deducted from victories, and the points thus
-obtained decided the award, but in the latter year the present system
-was adopted: a win counts a point for, and a defeat counts a point
-against; losses are deducted from wins, and a ratio is calculated
-between the figure thus obtained and the number of finished matches,
-draws being ignored. Thus, if a county plays 20 matches, wins 11, loses
-4, and draws 5, the figure is 11-4, _i.e._ 7; the proportional fraction
-is 7/15 (15 being the number of completed matches), and the figure
-of merit 46.66, the original vulgar fraction being, for the sake of
-convenience, multiplied by 100 and reduced to a decimal.
-
-Referring back to the list once more, we note that Gloucestershire was
-not beaten in 1876 or 1877. Lancashire lost no match in 1881, and won
-six games with an innings to spare. Lancashire and Notts had identical
-figures in 1882; but critics were inclined to favour the superiority
-of Lancashire, as having beaten Notts on one of the occasions when the
-two counties met, while the other match was drawn. Notts in 1884 won
-nine games out of ten, and drew the tenth—a great record, eclipsed by
-Yorkshire, who lost no match in 1900, and only one in both 1901 and
-1902. Yorkshire’s career since 1889 has been curious: in that year
-she played Sussex at the very end of the season, the “wooden spoon”
-depending on the result; however, Yorkshire won. In 1890 she was third.
-Then followed two bad years, but in 1893 the big county was at the top,
-and also in five of the next nine years, her lowest place being fourth
-in 1897. Surrey has a fine sequence of six headships, beginning with
-1886, by far the largest series on the list.
-
-A word may here be added on the connection between the Marylebone
-Club and the counties. The club has always religiously abstained
-from interfering in county matters unasked, though reserving to
-itself the sole right of deciding all questions connected with
-the game in general. But at times there seem to have been signs
-of a little petulance on the part of some of the counties, or
-their representatives, kindly patronage having been mistaken for
-interference. Nothing, however, could be more satisfactory than the
-present state of things, the M.C.C. being regarded, as it rightly
-should be regarded, as the supreme _junta_ of cricket, and consequently
-as the oracle to be consulted in case of difficulty, and the arbiter
-in the event of difference. The county delegates discuss all county
-matters, and refer the results of their deliberations to the M.C.C.,
-with a request that the club will duly hall-mark them, and settle any
-disputes or questions that may arise out of them. A powerful neutral is
-indeed necessary as arbitrator, seeing that the County Cricket Council,
-which was born in 1887, proclaimed its own dissolution in 1890, having
-shown no great capacity for managing its own affairs.
-
-We may now note a few of the more important landmarks in the history
-of county cricket. The question of qualification, as already stated,
-was raised as early as in 1868, for it was felt to be an abuse, as well
-as unfair to certain counties, that men should be allowed to represent
-two counties in one year; it was, however, an unwritten law that a man
-did not play against the county of his birth, even if he did not play
-for it. Thus Howitt, who was practically identified with Middlesex,
-did not play against his native Notts. Southerton, however, who
-played regularly for Surrey by the residential qualification, always
-represented Sussex against Surrey, often to the discomfiture of his
-foster-county. However, it was not till 1872 that formal legislation
-took place, when the following arrangements were made:—
-
- (1) No man to play for more than one county in the same year.
-
- (2) Any player with a double qualification to state at the beginning
- of each season for which of the counties he proposed to play.
-
- (3) Three years’ _bona fide_ residence to qualify professionals; two
- years sufficient for amateurs.
-
-These regulations were passed at Lord’s, but next year a meeting, held
-at the Oval, asked that the Lord’s authorities would put professionals
-and amateurs on the same footing, and two years of residence are
-now required of both alike. It was also enacted that under the term
-“residence” was included the parental roof, provided that it was open
-to a man as an occasional home. Lord Harris proposed in 1880 that the
-two years should be reduced to one, but did not carry his motion,
-though it was and is felt that in certain cases, _e.g._ in that of an
-Englishman born in India, or of an officer home on furlough, the rule
-bears rather hardly. It was further passed in 1898 that a man who had
-played for a particular county for five years was permanently qualified
-for it, provided that the series had not been broken by his playing for
-another.
-
-It seems hardly credible, considering what county cricket has grown
-to be, to hear that not till 1890 was any real classification of
-counties undertaken; however, it was at a meeting of the moribund
-Cricket Council, held at the Oval on 11th August, that eight counties
-were pronounced to be first-class, and to be the competitors for the
-championship in 1891. The sacred eight were:—
-
- Notts. Kent. Yorkshire.
- Lancashire. Middlesex. Sussex.
- Surrey. Gloucestershire.
-
-And these were to play home and home matches with each other. In
-1892—prospective legislation this—the lowest of the first-class
-counties was to play the highest of the second-class for its place,
-and various details were worked out in connection with this scheme,
-but when the Council assembled at Lord’s on 8th December of the same
-year, so much difficulty and trouble occurred over the question of
-classification that it was felt to be a relief when a representative of
-Middlesex jumped up and proposed that “this Council do adjourn _sine
-die_.” The resolution was accepted with gratitude, and the County
-Cricket Council was no more.
-
-Next year Somersetshire, having arranged a purely first-class
-programme, announced the fact at the annual meeting of county
-secretaries, and was duly recognised as a first-class county. In
-1894 the matches played by Warwickshire, Derbyshire, Hampshire,
-Leicestershire, and Essex were recognised as first-class, though for
-convenience the counties were considered to be outside the competition
-for that year. In 1899 Worcestershire made a similar announcement to
-that of Somerset, and was admitted into the sacred circle, thus making
-the number of first-class counties up to fifteen. With these increases
-in the number of competitors, it was clearly impossible to maintain
-the original principle that each county should play home and home
-matches with every other, especially in those years when an Australian
-eleven was in England. Some of the larger and richer counties manage to
-get through so huge a programme, even with Australian matches thrown
-in, but in ordinary years the original number of eight is retained as
-the qualifying number, reducible by decree of the M.C.C. in those years
-when reduction is necessary. It was in consequence of the increase in
-the number of the playing counties that the proportional system of 1895
-was introduced.
-
-We may now glance at the history of the various first-class counties,
-taking them seriatim; and I must here express my indebtedness to K. S.
-Ranjitsinhji’s _Jubilee Book of Cricket_, which is a perfect mine of
-information on the subject.
-
-_Derbyshire._—Though the county club only came to its birth in 1870,
-cricket had long flourished in the land, fostered largely, as one
-authority tells us, by the clergy. “The game in Derbyshire,” he tells
-us, “owes much at one time and another to the parsons—a fact that is
-perhaps worthy of more general recognition than is sometimes allowed.”
-The first appearance of the new county was remarkable, as on the Old
-Trafford ground, in its very first match, it defeated no less a side
-than Lancashire by an innings and 11 runs, the home county mustering
-no more than 25 notches in its first innings, when Gregory actually
-had six wickets for 9 runs. So strong was the county attack in its
-early days, Gregory being reinforced by Platts and Hickton, Flint, W.
-Mycroft, and Hay, that the eleven was jestingly described as consisting
-of ten bowlers and a wicket-keeper, the batting being by no means
-powerful. Mycroft was one of the most formidable bowlers in England,
-but with the decadence of himself and the rest of the band, the bowling
-weakened as the batting improved, though at last the latter, thanks
-partly to the transfer of good men to other counties, failed so sadly
-that in 1887 the county was reduced to the second class, only to be
-restored in 1895, and in that year to reach as high a place as fifth
-in the championship competition. Fine bowling was again the chief
-contributory to this success, G. G. Walker, George Davidson, Porter,
-and Hume, with Storer to keep wicket, being backed by such good
-batsmen as S. H. Evershed, L. G. Wright, and Chatterton. In Davidson
-and Storer, indeed, Derbyshire possessed a pair of wonderfully fine
-all-round men, Davidson’s premature death being a grievous loss. Last
-year (1902) the fortunes of Derbyshire were not particularly brilliant,
-but the county, always a by-word for bad luck, especially at one period
-when it seemed impossible for its captain to win the toss, made a good
-step forward. It is unfortunate for a hard-working and enthusiastic
-committee that the Derby public gives to cricket but one tithe of the
-support that it lavishes on football; however, there are plenty of
-liberal supporters of the club, which has also, in its times of need,
-proved its ability for raising the necessary funds by means of bazaars
-and the like. The ground, which is at Derby, has a total extent of
-eleven acres, with a good pavilion and an excellent pitch.
-
-Essex, founded in 1874, originally settled at Brentwood, but migrated
-to Leyton, as a more accessible place. The county has had a hard fight
-in the past to make both ends meet; indeed, at one time the end seemed
-to be at hand, but kindly friends, chiefly in the persons of C. M.
-Tebbut and C. E. Green, helped it out of its trouble. To the latter’s
-enthusiasm the very existence of the club is largely due. Created
-first-class in 1895, Essex has never achieved the championship, though
-it has more than once knocked possible champions out, especially in its
-earlier years, when the ground was not all that a batsman could desire;
-but in 1901, thanks to some of the modern patent “mixtures” used in
-dressing the pitch, so easy was the wicket that it was impossible,
-apparently, to get batsmen out, and the scoring was in consequence
-abnormally large. By way of revenge, when the ground is spoilt by
-rain, it is absolutely unplayable. In cricketers Essex has been rich:
-C. J. Kortright is one of the fastest bowlers of this age or any
-other, and in the days of rough pitches was a terror to the county’s
-opponents; C. M’Gahey and P. Perrin, known as “the Essex twins,” have
-helped to win or save many a match; while in Young, an ex-sailor, the
-county unearthed a bowler who was good enough to play for England in
-1899, but has done little or nothing since. The name of A. P. Lucas
-must not be omitted, as, though he is now some forty-six years old,
-he plays cricket in as sound and stylish a fashion as when he was an
-undergraduate at Cambridge. As before hinted, though Essex has never
-been close up for the championship, it has always been a factor to be
-reckoned with.
-
-Gloucestershire is, of course, “the county of the Graces,” which
-is synonymous with stating that its fortunes have been watched and
-assisted by three of the most talented and experienced cricketers
-who have ever taken the field. In the early days, it seemed to exist
-by them and for them; but though professional talent appeared but
-slowly, a sturdy band of amateurs soon gathered round the brotherhood,
-and showed that good batting, especially when attended by superb
-fielding, can compensate for only fair bowling. Such men as W. O.
-Moberley, F. Townsend, W. Fairbanks, W. R. Gilbert, and J. A. Bush (the
-wicket-keeper) were both scorers and savers of runs. Of the Graces it
-is needless to say anything; they were batsmen, bowlers, and fieldsmen,
-all of different types, but all of one class. E. M.’s fielding at point
-was only to be matched by G. F.’s at long-leg and W. G.’s anywhere,
-while it was mainly in county cricket that the Doctor’s famous leg-trap
-was so successful. Pages might be devoted to what the champion did for
-Gloucestershire, but probably no individual triumph ever delighted him
-so much as that it should, in 1874, four years after its foundation,
-be the champion county of England. It was in a Gloucestershire match
-that Grace scored his hundredth century, completed the 1000 runs that
-he made in the single month of May 1895, and twice scored a double
-century, _v._ Kent in 1887 and _v._ Yorkshire in 1888. To pry deeper
-with the pen into the great man’s performance would be to write,
-what has been written before, a history of modern cricket or his own
-biography: the works would be almost identical. Woof is undoubtedly
-the best professional bowler that the county has unearthed, just as
-Board is the best wicket-keeper, but Midwinter, the Anglo-Australian,
-Paish, and Roberts have all done good service with the ball. Ferris,
-however, another Australian who settled in Gloucestershire, quite lost
-his bowling as his batting improved. Of more recent players the most
-prominent are undoubtedly Charles Townsend, son of the aforementioned
-Frank Townsend, and G. L. Jessop. Like Ferris, the former lost a little
-of his bowling when he became—he has now apparently retired—the best
-left-handed batsman in England. Of Jessop’s hurricane hitting and
-rapid scoring the whole cricket world has heard and talked. The county
-ground is at Bristol, and is well equipped for its purpose, but the
-more famous cricket used to be played on the grounds of Clifton and
-Cheltenham Colleges, the Cheltenham “Week” being one of the events of
-the season. One hears, however, that the Clifton cricket ground will be
-used no more for county matches, owing to the lack of local support. In
-the early days the matches between Middlesex and Gloucestershire, two
-teams of powerful amateur batsmen, were famous for the long scoring
-that prevailed.
-
-Hampshire, as already stated, was the champion county as far back as,
-roughly speaking, 1780, its famous downs, Windmill Down and Broad
-Halfpenny Down, having been the scene of many great contests in the
-days when the Hambledon Club was the champion of England. The history
-of those days and of the heroes of those days has been so often and
-so admirably written, besides being somewhat foreign to the scope of
-this chapter, that one need do little more than record the names of
-David Harris and William Beldham, as the champion bowler and batsman of
-their day. But Hampshire found that cricket, like everything else, is
-transient and ephemeral, and almost a century after the championship
-days, in 1874, to be accurate, the old Cambridge captain, Clement
-Booth, worked hard to restore the county’s old prestige. Even his
-energy failed, for, as already noted, it was not till 1894 that the
-county was recognised as being of first-class merit. Hampshire has
-naturally been the county of the soldier cricketer, and can boast of
-E. G. Wynyard and R. M. Poore as being probably the best batsmen that
-ever wore the King’s uniform, J. E. Greig, another soldier, being but
-little behind them. What the value of these men was to the county is
-amply demonstrated by the fact that in the absence of the first two
-Hants won never a match in 1900, but with Greig’s appearance next year
-the county, with six each of wins, losses, and draws, at least gave as
-good as she got. In E. I. M. Barrett and the professional Barton the
-army is still further represented in the Hampshire ranks, with a new
-and valuable civilian recruit in Llewelyn. In fact, now that the piping
-times of peace have arrived, and the soldier cricketers listen for the
-pavilion’s bell rather than the _réveillé_ of the bugle, Hants may
-well hope to find herself higher up the ladder of cricket. Other good
-names are those of the two Cantabs, A. J. L. Hill and F. E. Lacey, the
-present secretary of the M.C.C. The ground, a very fine one, is in, or
-rather near, Southampton, the club having bought the freehold of it,
-and it is a great improvement on the classical but unsuitable Antelope
-ground, situated in the middle of the town.
-
-[Illustration: _AN OLD “PLAY” BILL._]
-
-Kent was one of the pioneers of cricket, the earliest match which she
-played as a county dating back to 1711, nearly two hundred years ago,
-when she tackled an eleven of All England. It was, however, a full
-century later when she was at her prime, supported by such famous
-performers as Alfred Mynn, Fuller Pilch, Adams, Wenman, “Felix,” and
-others; but of these Pilch was a Suffolk man, who was induced to settle
-in Kent and give his services to the county. Mynn was probably one of
-the finest all-round cricketers that ever lived—a fine bat, tremendous
-hitter, and a grand bowler of the very fast type; yet it is recorded
-that “off one of Mr. Mynn’s tremendous shooters” T. A. Anson, a Cantab
-wicket-keeper, stumped a man, “using the left hand only”! In later days
-Kent has continued to flourish exceedingly, but has never achieved
-champion honours, being, as a rule, like most of the southern counties,
-deficient in bowling, though Willsher, whose career terminated in the
-early ‘seventies, was a left-handed bowler who was second to none.
-He was also the hero of the first great no-balling incident. No one
-has worked harder for Kent cricket, and cricket in general, than Lord
-Harris, to whose vigour, and to whose enthusiastic efforts to enforce
-the proper spirit in which the game should be played, the county owes
-a deep debt of gratitude. The headquarters of the county club, which
-was established in 1842, the year of the first Canterbury “Week,” are
-at Canterbury, but the executive rightly believes in the distribution
-of matches throughout the county, and we find that county games have
-been played, and are still played, not merely at Canterbury, but at
-Gravesend, Catford Bridge, Beckenham, Tonbridge—where there is also
-a “week,”—Maidstone, Tunbridge Wells, and Blackheath—truly a goodly
-list for a county that is not abnormally large. The Mote ground at
-Maidstone probably possesses a greater slope than any other ground on
-which great games are played. Among the more famous Kent cricketers we
-may quote the names of W. Yardley, W. H. Patterson, J. R. Mason, F.
-Marchant, W. Rashleigh, E. F. S. Tylecote, Stanley Christopherson, the
-brothers Penn, W. M. Bradley, C. J. Burnup, and Hearnes innumerable.
-Than J. R. Mason, the late captain, there are few finer all-round men.
-
-Lancashire dates back to 1864 as a county club, but Liverpool and
-Manchester had long had strong clubs of their own, and at present the
-whole county is a perfect hotbed of cricket. Nowhere is a more critical
-and enthusiastic body of spectators to be found, though cricket “caught
-on” later in Lancashire, as in other northern counties, than in the
-south. The bulk of the big matches, including one test match when the
-Australians are in evidence, are played at the Old Trafford ground in
-Manchester, where there is huge accommodation and a capital pavilion,
-a reduced facsimile of that at Lord’s; but the wicket, though the turf
-is excellent, is often on the slow side, as Manchester is a rainy spot.
-A certain number of big matches are also allotted to the Aigburth
-ground, Liverpool. It would be hard to say who is the finest player
-that the county has produced, but it is easy to name the most popular
-and the most famous, namely, A. N. Hornby, the present president, who
-played his first county match in 1867, and has only recently retired
-from county cricket. He was for many years the captain of the team and
-has probably stolen more runs (and run more partners out) than any
-other cricketer. From a mere cricket point of view, A. G. Steel is
-doubtless the greatest of Lancastrians as an all-round player, but his
-career was all too short, while another equally famous Lancastrian, A.
-C. Maclaren, holds the record for the highest individual score made
-in big cricket, to wit, his 424, made against Somerset in 1895. Like
-Hornby, he is a Harrovian, while Steel, as all the world knows, or
-ought to know, hails from Marlborough. Among other great amateurs who
-have played for the county should be mentioned the names of Appleby,
-Rowley, Makinson, F. W. Wright, Eccles, and Crossfield, while the roll
-of professionals is equally famous—Barlow, Briggs, Watson, Mold,
-Crossland, Albert Ward, Tyldesley, Pilling (prince of wicket-keepers),
-Frank Sugg, and others. It is a curious fact, however, that no less
-than four of the great Lancashire bowlers have, rightly or wrongly,
-been severely criticised, and even penalised, for throwing when they
-were supposed to be bowling.
-
-Leicestershire took to itself a county club in 1878, the very first
-match being played against the first Australian eleven, and a very
-fair fight being made against that strong team. Matches had, however,
-been played under the title of “Leicestershire” between the years 1789
-and 1829. Like other counties, Leicestershire has had some hard times,
-pecuniarily, to pass through, but now that the storm has been safely
-weathered and a permanent home found, greater prosperity in every sense
-may be hoped for. It cannot be said that the county has hitherto had
-great success in the county contests, as eleventh is the highest place
-it has yet reached; but the 1902 eleven was considered to be much
-stronger than any other that had represented the county, so that, as
-there is plenty of fight left in the men, better results may be looked
-for. Pougher is probably the best all-round man that Leicestershire has
-produced, the bright, particular star in his career being the bowling
-down of five Australian wickets for _no_ runs. This occurred at Lord’s
-in 1896. In C. E. de Trafford, the present captain, Leicestershire
-possesses one of the hardest hitters and fastest scorers in England,
-and in Woodcock one of the fastest bowlers. Among its amateur players
-have been numbered, or are numbered, R. A. H. Mitchell, T. S. Pearson,
-H. P. Arnall Thompson, G. S. and C. Marriott, C. J. B. Wood, and Dr.
-R. Macdonald, and, of professionals, King, Knight, Geeson, Whiteside,
-Parnham, Rylott, Wheeler, Warren, and Tomlin.
-
-The Middlesex County Club first saw the light in 1864, the year of
-Lancashire’s birth, but, like all other counties, had played matches
-long anterior to that year under the style and title of “Middlesex”; in
-fact, in 1802 and 1803, as mentioned before, twenty-two of Middlesex
-encountered twenty-two of Surrey. Middlesex is as much “the county of
-the Walkers” as Gloucestershire is “the county of the Graces,” for the
-name of John Walker is identified with the county as closely as are the
-initials V. E., R. D., and I. D. Indeed, it is to their perseverance
-and enthusiasm, to say nothing of their unbounded generosity, that the
-club ever existed or continued to exist. The first home of the club
-was a ground near the Cattle Market, in Islington. It then migrated to
-the Athletic Club’s ground at Lillie Bridge, and was nearly dissolved
-for want of funds. A migration to Prince’s ground in Chelsea helped to
-replenish the treasury, and a final resting-place—at least all hope it
-will prove to be final—was found at Lord’s in 1877. It is noteworthy
-that in 1866, only two years after the club’s foundation, Middlesex
-was the champion county, and was specially invited to play All England
-next year; but the result was disastrous. The weakness of Middlesex was
-always due to a dearth of bowling; in amateur batting Gloucestershire
-itself was hardly its superior; but of late years J. T. Hearne was in
-the very first flight of bowlers, as also A. E. Trott, the Australian
-professional. Howitt, of Nottingham, long did good service, as also
-Burton, Clarke, Phillips, and Rawlin, most of whom—one blushes to
-say it—were aliens. Several brotherhoods have done good service to
-Middlesex—in triads, the Walkers, Studds, and Fords, and in pairs, the
-Lytteltons, Webbes, and Douglases; while of the individuals who have
-been at the very top of the tree may be mentioned especially the three
-Walkers, C. T. Studd, A. J. Webbe, Sir T. C. O’Brien, A. W. Ridley, T.
-S. Pearson, G. F. Vernon, A. E. Stoddart, F. G. J. Ford, S. W. Scott,
-C. I. Thornton, G. MacGregor, E. A. Nepean, and a host of others who
-are only in a sense of the word “minor lights.” To attempt to single
-out individuals for comparison would be equally hopeless and invidious;
-it is only when we recall the weakness of the Middlesex bowling that
-we appreciate the strength of the batting that has enabled it to hold
-its own, though since 1866 championship honours have not come the
-metropolitan county’s way. It has, however, till last year, 1902,
-held a high place. Among its amateur bowlers should be mentioned the
-Walkers—of course,—J. Robertson, A. F. J. Ford, E. A. Nepean, C. K.
-Francis, A. W. Ridley, and E. Rutter, while no county has produced such
-a trio of amateur wicket-keepers as M. Turner, Hon. A. Lyttelton, and
-Gregor MacGregor, the present captain of the side.
-
-Nottinghamshire played its first match in 1771, but the Trent Bridge
-ground was not opened till 1839, nor the club formed till 1859 or 1860;
-but it is safe to say that no club has sent forth such a stream of
-great cricketers, some to play for their own county, and some to take
-out naturalisation papers in others, to say nothing of hosts of useful
-second-class players and practice-bowlers. The Trent Bridge ground,
-originally opened by the famous slow bowler William Clarke, is rather
-larger than most grounds, and tries the batsman’s powers of endurance
-rather severely, but the pavilion and the other appointments of the
-ground are inferior to none, Lord’s alone and the Oval being excepted.
-Of the famous players the name is legion; posterity and contemporaries
-must settle among themselves as to whether George Parr (the great
-leg-hitter), Daft (the stylist), Shrewsbury (the all-patient), W. Gunn
-(the personification of style and patience combined), or Barnes were
-the greatest, not forgetting that among Notts batsmen were such men
-as A. O. Jones, J. A. Dixon, and J. G. Beevor, with William Oscroft,
-Selby, Wild, Summers, Flowers, and Guy, while the bowling names are a
-dazzling array of talent—Clarke, Tinley, Jackson, Grundy, Alfred Shaw,
-J. C. Shaw, Morley, Flowers, Martin M’Intyre, Attewell, and John Gunn,
-with Biddulph, Sherwin, and Wild as wicket-keepers; while to the best
-of bowlers should be added the name of Lockwood, who, unsuccessful for
-his native county, has done wonderful work for his adopted county,
-Surrey. Notts has been champion in no less than thirteen years, and
-thus heads the list.
-
-Somersetshire can boast of no recorded antiquity as a cricketing
-society, the county club only being inaugurated in 1875. Curiously
-enough, the first meeting to consider the proposed club was held
-at Sidmouth, and the first circular issued from Ilfracombe, both
-Devonshire towns. It was not till 1891 that Somerset, having defeated
-all the other second-class counties, passed into the upper ranks, being
-then almost as strong as it ever has been since. The county ground at
-Taunton is a gem, but rather a small gem; hence hits into churchyard
-and river are not infrequent, and scoring rules high. Further, it is
-a tradition of the county that it generally beats Surrey, and not
-seldom Yorkshire, in the Taunton match. Of its players, H. T. Hewett
-was a splendid left-handed forcing player; L. C. H. Palairet is a
-grand player and a stylist that has no rival; his brother, R. C. N.,
-who has partly retired, was always valuable, but inferior to his
-elder brother; S. M. J. Woods has lost his wonderful bowling, but is
-a fine and scoring batsman; V. T. Hill was a wonderful hitter, while
-J. B. Challen, C. E. Dunlop, W. C. Hadley, and G. Fowler were all
-useful men. No great professional players have as yet been unearthed,
-as Braund is a Surrey man who has cast in his lot with the western
-county, though Tyler, Nicholls, Cranfield, and Gill were, or are, a
-fairly good quartette of bowlers; but bowling has always been a weak
-point, ever since Woods strained his side. There has never been a
-dearth of wicket-keeping, all amateur, such names as A. E. Newton,
-Rev. A. P. Wickham, and L. H. Gay being famous. It must be admitted,
-however, that, with its crack players ageing, and new blood not being
-forthcoming, the prospects of Somersetshire are not at their brightest;
-but whatever the brilliancy of the prospects, there can be no question
-as to the brilliancy of the cricket as played both in the present and
-in the past. No side has been more exhilarating in its methods than the
-sides captained successively by Hewett and Woods.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _Thos. Rowlandson._
-_RURAL SPORTS OR A CRICKET MATCH EXTRAORDINARY AT BALL’S POND,
-NEWINGTON, ON OCT. 3rd, 1811._
-(_Probably the return Match to that
-mentioned in the advertisement facing page 152._)]
-
-Though Surrey has only been champion eleven times to Nottinghamshire’s
-thirteen, yet she might quite fairly assume the words _nulli secunda_
-as her motto. Not that unbroken success has been the law of her
-existence, for there were times when Surrey’s fortunes were at a
-very low ebb, but patience and perseverance have enabled the county
-to win its way upward, while in the list of brilliant cricketers few
-counties, perhaps none, can claim the right to enrol more names. The
-foundation of the club dates back to 1845, the first match between
-Surrey and England to 1747, and by the end of that century, when the
-dispersion of the Hambledon Club set several Surrey players—Beldham
-(“Silver Billy”) among them—free to return to their native shire,
-the county was actually strong enough to play fourteen of England,
-but then almost collapsed, as far as organised cricket was concerned,
-for over thirty years. With resuscitation came success, and for
-three consecutive years, 1849-51, Surrey was unbeaten, her successes
-continuing till the ‘seventies, and being due to such fine amateurs
-as F. P. Miller, C. G. Lane, and F. Burbridge, supported by H. H.
-Stephenson, Lockyer, Southerton, Griffith, Mortlock, Julius Cæsar,
-Jupp, the brothers Humphrey, Caffyn, Street, and Pooley. But as these
-men passed into the veteran stage, no others of equal merit arose
-to take their place, and with the bowling sadly deteriorated, the
-position of Surrey was quite unworthy of its name and fame, though by
-a kind of spurt she was champion county in 1872, Jupp, the Humphreys,
-Pooley, and Southerton being the chief factors in this success, which
-was not repeated for fifteen years, when for six consecutive seasons
-Surrey headed the table. It was mainly the stubborn discipline of
-John Shuter, the Winchester cricketer, that kept the eleven together
-during its period of depression, and he had his reward when Lohmann,
-Bowley, Beaumont, and Sharpe, by their excellent bowling, did much to
-make their foster-county—none of these were natives of Surrey—forge
-ahead and stay ahead. In later days Richardson and W. Lockwood (the
-discarded Nottinghamshire player) bore the brunt of the bowling.
-It is instructive to note that so many of the Surrey bowlers have
-been born in other counties, but if even the fact lends itself to
-criticism from one point of view, it at least throws excellent light
-on the Surrey system of selection and training where young players are
-concerned. Surrey’s wicket-keepers have been Lockyer, Pooley, and Wood
-in practically unbroken succession, and all three were of the best,
-Lockyer’s name being worthy of classification with those of Pilling
-and Blackham. Of her batsmen, the names of some of her professionals
-have already been mentioned, but there are others who are and will be
-equally, or more, famous—those, to wit, of Abel and Hayward, Maurice
-Read and Brockwell, and in a less degree Lockwood and Holland. Among
-amateur batsmen the name of W. W. Read is a name that will never be
-forgotten, nor those of the successive captains—J. Shuter, K. J. Key,
-and D. L. A. Jephson, while we may add those of W. E. Roller, H. D. G.
-Leveson-Gower, F. H. Boult, C. W. Burls, V. F. S. Crawford, as those of
-men who have at different periods rendered good service to the county.
-Though not situated amid picturesque scenery, the Oval is _qua_ cricket
-ground perfect, the accommodation being ample and the wickets superb.
-The new pavilion alone cost from £25,000 to £30,000. The Prince of
-Wales is the county’s landlord.
-
-Sussex can boast a venerable antiquity and the royal patronage of
-George IV. when he was Prince of Wales, these being the days of William
-Lillywhite, the “Nonpareil,” Box and the Broadbridges, to say nothing
-of C. G. Taylor, the Cantab “crack.” The county club was formed in
-1839 on Brown’s ground, the said Brown being the famous fast bowler,
-who is said to have bowled through a coat, and to have killed a dog on
-the other side! But the builder was inexorable in Brighton, and the
-county was hustled from place to place, till it settled finally—it
-is hoped—in its present splendid ground at Hove, which is, however,
-save in the comfort of its appointment, not one whit better for cricket
-purposes than the Brunswick ground, which the county used between 1847
-and 1871. In modern times the names of great Sussex bowlers are few,
-Southerton playing but rarely, and the others being Tate, the brothers
-Hide, Parris, and Walter Humphreys, the “Lobster.” The earlier names
-include those of several Lillywhites, Wisden, Brown, and Dean, while
-of wicket-keepers we may quote those of Box and Ellis, Harry Phillips,
-and Harry Butt. One is almost bewildered by the dazzling list of great
-batsmen who have represented Sussex—C. G. Taylor, Wisden, J. M.
-Cotterill, L. Winslow, R. T. Ellis, W. Newham, G. Brann, F. M. Lucas,
-Bean, Killick, and Marlow, to say nothing of the great Anglo-Australian
-player, W. L. Murdoch, who settled in Sussex and was at once invited
-to captain the eleven. But great as these names are, the names of
-C. B. Fry and K. S. Ranjitsinhji are perhaps even greater. They are
-household words at present, as are their wonderful feats with the bat,
-which—as the tale is not yet complete—may be left to be chronicled by
-posterity. At the present day, were the Sussex bowling in any sense
-on a par with its batting, the county would probably carry all before
-it. One record of Fry’s should, however, be recorded, as it is so far
-ahead of any similar feat. In 1901 he actually scored six successive
-centuries, the scores being: 106 _v._ Hants, 209 _v._ Yorks, 149 _v._
-Middlesex, 105 _v._ Surrey, 140 _v._ Kent, and 105 _v._ Yorkshire. The
-last of these was made for an Eleven of England, all the others for
-Sussex. No one else, not even W. G. Grace, has ever made more than
-three hundreds in succession.
-
-The Warwickshire County C.C. only dates back to 1882, but it was some
-years before it “caught on,” though it was the energy of William Ansell
-in pushing the club that led not only to its recognition, but, more or
-less directly, to the dissolution of the County Cricket Council. Being
-first of the second-class counties in 1892 and 1893—bracketed with
-Derbyshire in the latter year—it was duly promoted to higher rank, and
-opened the 1894 season in sensational fashion by defeating, in rapid
-succession, Notts, Surrey, and Kent, no other county being successful
-that year in beating Surrey at the Oval. The county has always held its
-own well, even though, with the exception of the internationals, Lilley
-and W. G. Quaife, it has produced no very prominent men: it has won
-its way by steady and consistent cricket, rather than by brilliancy.
-The Quaifes—there are two of them—were originally Sussex men, and
-it is but right to record that a good deal of feeling was caused by
-the manner of their secession. The present[2] and the only captain of
-the club is an old Eton and Cambridge captain, H. W. Bainbridge, who
-has been blessed in having so superlative a wicket-keeper as Lilley,
-and such prodigies of steadiness as Quaife and Kinneir, to serve under
-him. L. C. Docker, the brothers Hill, and T. S. Fishwick are the
-better-known amateurs, with Devey, Charlesworth, Santall, Hargreave,
-Field, Pallett, Shilton, Diver, and Whitehead among the professionals,
-few or none of whom have made a great stir in the cricket world. The
-county ground is at Edgbaston, a suburb of Birmingham, and being well
-equipped in every way, was selected as the scene of the first test
-match played in 1902, a match that is dealt with in a later chapter.
-
-The existence of Worcestershire, the latest recruit to the first
-class, may be considered as due to the superlative excellence of three
-brothers, the brothers Foster of Malvern College, whose initials, W.
-L., H. K., and R. E., are as familiar as are those of the Studds,
-Graces, or Walkers; indeed, some wit, with a keen ear for assonance,
-has dubbed the county “Fostershire.” Splendid batsmen as they all are,
-no one of them is a bowler, wherein they fall behind the three great
-fraternities quoted above. The family has, however, a record of its
-own, as in 1899, playing against Hampshire, R. E. scored 134 and 101
-not out, and W. L. 140 and 172 not out; further, R. E. has a private
-record of _his_ own, having made 102 not out and 136 against the
-Players at Lord’s in 1900. In Burrows, Wilson, Arnold, and Bowley, with
-Straw to keep wicket, Worcestershire has put some useful professionals
-into the field, while the other better-known amateurs are W. W. Lowe,
-G. Simpson-Hayward, and the Bromley-Martins. The county ground is to
-be found at Worcester, and, like most of its sort, is in all respects
-excellent.
-
-On Yorkshire cricket, and especially on Yorkshire bowlers, volumes
-might be written, but powerful as the county is now in the present,
-and has been in the past, it has not been free from the ordinary
-vicissitudes of life in general and of cricket in particular, to which
-fact allusion has been made earlier in this chapter. It has also
-been stated before that Sheffield was the original home of Yorkshire
-cricket, being a club strong enough to play the rest of the county and
-beat it, and boasting in Dearman and Marsden, the famous left-hander,
-two of the great stars of the early nineteenth century. However,
-the county club was organised in 1862, with the Sheffield ground at
-Bramall Lane as its headquarters, though the big county is so rich in
-fine grounds that it distributes its favours among many towns. In the
-plethora of great professionals the amateur element has always been
-in a minority in the county eleven, though the names of Lord Hawke,
-T. L. Taylor, Frank Mitchell, and F. S. Jackson, and in a quieter way
-of George Savile, Rev. E. S. Carter, A. Sellers, F. W. Milligan, E.
-T. Hirst, and R. W. Frank, will always be familiar to cricketers, to
-which may be added that of G. A. B. Leatham, whose wicket-keeping
-powers would have found him a place in many a good county eleven; but
-the county of Pinder and the two Hunters has not been hard up for a
-custodian for many years. Of the amateurs, be it said that no more
-brilliant all-round cricketer has walked out of a pavilion than F. S.
-Jackson, and that in Lord Hawke the county found an ideal man, apart
-from his batting powers, to command its side, a side, too, that has
-for many years been composed exclusively of Yorkshire-born men. Lord
-Hawke found the county at a low ebb, shared its struggle upward, and
-is finally the proud leader of a body of men that lost but two county
-matches in three years, and he has had the additional satisfaction of
-helping to raise the county to such admirable financial condition,
-that it is able to treat its professionals with a liberality that but
-few other counties can emulate or even approach. It is not unnatural
-in consequence that the Yorkshire eleven should be practically a band
-of very happy and contented brothers. The names of the great county
-bowlers are legion: every one has read of Freeman and Emmett, Ulyett
-and Bates and Peate, Hirst and Rhodes, Slinn, Atkinson, Allan Hill,
-Peel, Haigh, Ulyett and Wainwright, but one notes with interest how
-many of these have been left-handers. Then the batsmen—Stephenson
-(E.), Rowbotham, Iddison (a lob bowler of much merit), the Greenwoods
-(Luke and Andrew), Ephraim Lockwood (of wonderful cutting powers),
-Bates, Louis Hall (the pioneer of stickers), Peel, Brown and
-Tunnicliffe, Denton and Wainwright, _cum multis aliis_. It is indeed
-a wonderful list of names, names of cricketers of all sorts and
-conditions, as versatile as they are numerous. One wonders, considering
-the years that they cover, that Yorkshire has ever been anything but
-champion county, especially as the names excluded are only a whit less
-well known than those that are included.
-
-[Illustration: _THE CRICKET GROUND AT DARNALL, NEAR SHEFFIELD._]
-
-Such in brief is the history, a mere sketch, of our more important
-counties, their rise and their fall: a full and complete account of
-them would fill the whole of a goodly volume, which would be replete
-with interest and anecdote, but which would require the patience and
-the genius of a Macaulay or a Froude for its adequate and comprehensive
-compilation. Cricket may indeed be but a mere pastime, but it is a
-pastime that has come home to the hearts of Englishmen, or at least
-to the hearts of a goodly number of Englishmen, during a period of
-some two hundred years. He who would write that history must be a man
-of infinite patience and vast perseverance. He will not find cricket
-history writ large in columns of big print, but, for the earlier days
-at least, often packed away in obscure corners of local journals.
-Thirty years ago there was no daily sporting paper, while the big
-“dailies” took but little notice of cricket matches. Add a hundred
-years on to the thirty, and only local papers record a great match.
-Consequently, he who would write a full and accurate account of the
-cricket played by the counties, must rummage even more painfully than
-the recorder of political facts, and in journals that are far less
-accessible and that give less prominence to the special facts of which
-the writer is in quest. The great work may yet be written, but the
-writing thereof will be largely a labour of love, for the divers into
-cricket lore are but few, and the writer will naturally wonder whether
-the game will be worth the candle.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _J. Lush._
-_THE EARL OF MARCH._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER VII
-
-AMATEURS AND PROFESSIONALS
-
-By the HON. R. H. LYTTELTON
-
-
-It would not appear to be a difficult task to make a clear and accurate
-definition of the two common words found at the head of this chapter.
-Forty years ago the making of such a definition would have been easy,
-and if we could regard things from an ideal point of view, it would
-be easy now. There are, however, so many difficulties at present in
-the way, so many changes in the carrying on of the game of cricket,
-so much acquiesced in which formerly would not have been dreamt of,
-that the old boundary line has been obliterated—all is confusion, and
-in too many cases there can hardly be said to be any difference or
-distinction between the amateur and professional in these days in the
-world of cricket.
-
-It is strange that such should be the case, and it is also strange that
-these difficulties should exist so much more in the case of cricket
-than any other game. Whether this always will be the case appears to
-be doubtful. In the case of rowing there seem to be dangers ahead, and
-perhaps in the world of football also. But if I am not misinformed,
-the rowing authorities are not troubled in the matter as far as this
-country is concerned. It is owing to the fact that in America there
-do not appear to be the same regulations on this vexed question as
-in England—and the American invasion of England includes the chief
-prizes of Henley as well as the tube railways of London. The rowing
-authorities have a very difficult task before them. To come to a
-right decision, and yet not to offend the feelings of a nation we all
-respect, and have every wish to be, from a sporting point of view, on
-good terms with, is by no means an easy task, but I can only hope that
-a satisfactory decision will be attained.
-
-Cricket, however, seems to stand altogether on a different footing to
-any other game. The boundary line between the two classes of amateurs
-and professionals has become blurred and indistinct, if indeed it has
-not entirely disappeared. As far as I know, no such state of things
-exists in other games, such as golf, tennis, football, or billiards.
-The reason why this is so seems to be twofold. The first is that if
-a man wants to play as much cricket as he likes he must practically
-devote five months of the year to nothing else. A match takes three
-days to finish, and the whole of each day is taken up by the game, and
-in this respect cricket stands alone. You may play golf or tennis every
-day if you have the opportunity; but two or three hours is enough for
-this, and the rest of the time may be spent in the counting-house.
-First-class cricket, however, now is of so exacting a nature that
-it really amounts to this, that nearly half the year must be wholly
-devoted to the game, and comparatively few amateurs can afford to do
-this. The other reason is somewhat on a par with the experiences of
-rowing men, and is because of the Australian invasion. International
-cricket between this country and Australia has come to stay, and it
-is much to be hoped this will always remain. Nothing in cricket is so
-interesting, and no other matches contain so many exciting elements,
-and in no other class of match is such a high standard of skill shown.
-In Australia, however, there does not seem to be any very clear
-distinction between the amateur and professional. In 1878, when they
-first came to England, the two Bannermans and, I think, Midwinter were
-classed as professionals, the rest as amateurs. In subsequent years
-there was no distinction drawn, and without going too minutely into the
-merits of the case, they are now all called amateurs. It may not be
-obvious what difference this makes to English cricket, but nevertheless
-on more than one occasion there has been friction, and it is notorious
-that the bone of contention is to be found in the fact that the
-English professionals have a somewhat well-founded idea in their
-minds that the Australian cricketers are really professionals like
-themselves, and they should in both countries stand on the same footing.
-
-It is necessary, however, that some comparison be made of the
-conditions that existed thirty years ago, with the state of things now.
-This is a delicate and thorny subject, and it is almost, if not quite,
-impossible to avoid treading on corns; but the matter is a critical one
-for the welfare of the great game, and some clear understanding should
-be arrived at, and to attain this the public should know all the facts,
-that they may come to a right opinion.
-
-It has been said that a definition of the words amateur and
-professional forty years ago would have been easy, and this is true.
-The question of money for the amateur was purely a personal one for
-himself. He played cricket according to his means. If he was of a
-sufficiently high class, and was qualified to play for a leading
-county, he played on the home ground if his business, if he had one,
-allowed him, and if he could not afford railway and hotel fares, he
-did not play the return match, it may be two hundred miles away. No
-doubt there were far fewer matches in those days, for Surrey, the chief
-county in the ‘sixties, only played on an average ten or eleven matches
-a year. For an amateur of Surrey to have played in all these matches
-was no doubt a tolerably arduous task, but it was not an impossible
-one. If the first-class amateur could not afford to play away from
-the neighbourhood of his home, he simply declined to play. The reason
-was obvious, but tact forbade the cause being inquired into, and the
-amateur was not thought any the worse of on this account. No doubt
-cricket was not in one sense the serious thing it is now. There were no
-carefully compiled and intolerably wearisome tables of statistics that
-drown one in these days; nevertheless there was just as much keenness
-for success, but championships and records did not constitute the
-_summum bonum_; it was the genuine sport that was chiefly considered.
-In other words, the game was generally carried on, in the best sense,
-in more of the amateur spirit than now, and this notwithstanding the
-fact that far more so-called amateurs play first-class cricket now than
-formerly. There was more cricket in matches of the class of Gentlemen
-of Worcestershire against Gentlemen of Warwickshire; the famous touring
-pure amateur clubs, such as Quidnuncs, Harlequins, I Zingari, and Free
-Foresters, played as they do now; and there were as many club matches
-played by the M.C.C. and Surrey clubs as were in those days wanted, and
-in these the amateur was able to take his part.
-
-The ambition of every player in these days is to reach such a measure
-of skill as to earn him a place in the picked eleven of England
-against Australia, and very properly is this the case. To represent
-the Gentlemen against the Players at Lord’s is still the goal of many,
-but not so much now as it was. For a University man a place in his
-University eleven is as keen an object of ambition now as it used to
-be, and though the bowling may be weak and the fielding not so good
-as it ought to be, still University cricket is the same as it always
-has been—the embodiment of the purest amateur spirit of the game.
-But forty years ago, to be selected to represent the Gentlemen or
-the Players, as the case might be, set the seal on both amateurs and
-professionals, in the same way as to be selected to play for England
-against Australia does now. The amateur came up cheerfully to share
-in the annual defeat that almost invariably awaited him; the bowling
-for most of them was too good, and his record, speaking generally, at
-Lord’s at any rate, would be laughed at by the modern critic, stuffed
-out as he is with centuries, statistics, and comparisons, but to be
-selected made him happy.
-
-The reader may now naturally ask, When and how does the amateur of
-forty years ago differ from the amateur of the present day? The
-question will be discussed more fully later on, but the answer is
-simply this, that in former times no amateur ever received one penny
-for his services, whether disguised under the name of expenses or by
-the receipts of a benefit match, euphemistically called a complimentary
-match. Here at once is the difference, and for the present it is
-sufficient merely to state the fact, and file it, as it were, for
-future reference.
-
-The professional of old was drawn from the same sources as he is now.
-He comes from the shop, from the factory, from the pit, and from the
-slum. He had by no means so much cricket as he has now in the way of
-first-class county matches, but he filled up his time, if he arrived
-at a certain height of skill, by playing a series of touring matches
-against local twenty-twos, and these matches, if they did nothing else,
-gave an impetus to local cricket. There can be no doubt, however,
-that an enormous change has taken place in the type of professional
-cricketer. The first-class modern player moves altogether in a higher
-plane. He earns far more money in populous centres, such as Bradford,
-London, and Manchester. He has been known to clear £2000 and more by
-a benefit match. A spectator coming on to Lord’s at five o’clock in
-the afternoon, during the annual match between Gentlemen and Players,
-might easily for a moment be uncertain which side were fielding. There
-could have been no mistake in old days. Older cricketers well remember
-Jemmy Grundy in an old velvet cap more fitted for the North Pole than
-an English cricket ground, such a cap as a poacher would wear. You can
-see prints of Hayward and Carpenter in spotted shirts and large belts
-and ties, and Jemmy Shaw bowling his hardest in a yellow shirt that did
-duty apparently for the whole summer. Now, without any disrespect to
-the amateurs, the professional is as smartly dressed as his opponents.
-He is clad in spotless white; he is smart; and, in fact, as far as
-appearance goes, he is an amateur, and good at that. Two reasons may be
-given for this. In the first place, he is more highly paid; in the next
-place, the great number of county matches brings him more frequently
-into contact with amateurs; and it is also true that county committees
-look more closely after the players than they did. The life of a
-professional is a very hard life in the way of work, and though a sound
-batsman, who is of steady habits, like poor Shrewsbury, can play for a
-long while, the fast bowlers are overweighted with the constant labour
-of bowling on too perfect wickets, and they cannot keep their pace and
-skill for much more than six or seven years.
-
-The professionals who are not good enough to play for a first-class
-county have by no means so good a time. They get engaged by clubs
-such as are found all over South Lancashire and in the West Riding
-of York, and they bowl for several hours all the week to members of
-the club at the nets, and on Saturdays play for the club in league
-matches. The results of these matches are tabulated in the local
-newspapers and in the sporting papers published on Sundays, and in
-their own district cause no end of excitement. The end of the season
-finds one of these clubs champion of the local league; and cricket is
-carried on very much like football in this respect. There are senior
-and junior leagues, there are Pleasant Sunday afternoon leagues, and
-in each of them there exists a carefully considered system of tables
-and elaborately calculated records of averages, and the leading
-cricketers, like the leading football players, are heroes. The game,
-however, as played in such matches, is of a distinctly lower type,
-and if report speaks truly, the umpires have often more than their
-proper share in determining the issue of the match. The professional
-supplements his income in other ways. He generally supplies bats and
-balls and other cricket materials, and sometimes, if he is a man of
-business, he establishes himself finally in a shop, more frequently in
-a public-house, and settles down for life.
-
-[Illustration:
- _MR. J. H. DARK._ _THE UMPIRE._
- (_Proprietor of Lords_). (_Wm. Caldecourt_).
- _WM. HILLYER._ _WM. MARTINGELL._]
-
-[Illustration: _FULLER PILCH_,
-_Who was considered, till the days of Dr. W. G. Grace, the best Batsman
-that had ever appeared_.]
-
-The descriptions of the amateur and professional as given above are
-accurate enough, and many of us who can remember the former state of
-things probably think that, in comparing the epoch of 1860 to 1870 with
-that of 1892 to 1902, the condition of things was better, as far as the
-amateur is concerned, in the ‘sixties, and worse for the professional,
-and that now the position is exactly reversed. An amateur should be
-either one thing or the other, but nobody can say in these days what he
-is. The change has taken place gradually, and began from causes that
-sprang into existence perhaps thirty years ago, and these we will now
-try to explain.
-
-Nobody who has watched the game carefully can fail to be struck with
-the wonderful development of county cricket. The ideal county cricket
-really exists, speaking of first-class counties alone, in the three
-counties of Nottingham, Yorkshire, and, we think, Derbyshire. Regarded
-impartially, a county ought to be represented solely by county players,
-but as a matter of fact this is not the case anywhere but in Nottingham
-and Yorkshire. But in many counties are to be found gentlemen who like
-to have first-class cricket in their county, and a county cricket club
-is founded. The financial prosperity of the club depends in a great
-measure on the success of the county eleven, and if a county has three
-or four amateurs who materially strengthen the side, the committee
-make great efforts to secure their services all through the season.
-The natural result follows. The amateur is driven to confess that he
-cannot afford the expenses of travelling and living at hotels, and he
-must decline to play. The winning of matches being the golden key to
-financial prosperity, the committees have been driven to adopt a system
-of paying the amateur money, that their counties may play their best
-elevens, and the first step in obliterating the boundary line that
-should exist between the amateur and professional has been taken, and
-what thirty years ago was done in one or two instances is now a matter
-of universal practice.
-
-I am now for the moment making no comment; only stating a fact. As far
-as the balance-sheet of the county club is concerned, you cannot assume
-that the club can run its eleven cheaply by playing amateurs, who in
-truth cost the committee as much per head as the professionals. It
-would involve too much worrying into detail, and might lead to other
-harmful consequences, to get exact statements of the cost of railway
-tickets, etc.; so there is a fixed payment in a majority of cases given
-to every amateur, and this fixed payment is on a sufficiently generous
-scale to enable many an impecunious amateur to devote his services
-to his county. Nor is this the only way of providing livelihoods for
-skilful amateurs. There has to be, of course, a secretary, and you can
-either appoint a cricketer to this post, and provide him with a clerk
-who can do the work while his employer is playing cricket, or else
-make the cricketer an under-secretary, both posts, of course, having
-a salary attached.[3] It is also, if report speaks truly, a matter of
-fairly common practice for employers somehow or other to find some
-employment for cricketers during the winter, of course at a salary, and
-it has therefore come to this, that many an amateur has found in the
-game of cricket a means of access to a livelihood. No distinction has
-yet been given between a complimentary match and a benefit; the result
-is much the same in both instances; the proceeds of gate-money, after
-deduction of expenses, are handed to the player for whom the match is
-played.
-
-A short time ago there was a proposal, emanating, if I am not mistaken,
-from the Australian authorities, that the M.C.C. should undertake
-the arranging and selection of an English eleven to represent this
-country in a series of matches in Australia. The committee of the
-M.C.C. undertook the task, though not, it must be confessed, in a very
-sanguine spirit. Their labours did not last long. Difficulties met
-them on the very threshold, and these difficulties were entirely on
-the ground of the amateurs’ expenses. Now it must be assumed that, if
-the principle of paying amateurs’ expenses be allowed, there ought to
-be no difficulty in the way of settling with amateurs. A manager has
-to go out; why should not he take all the tickets, pay the coaching
-and railway expenses and hotel bills, receive the proper share of
-the gate-money, and deliver the amateur safe back in his own country
-without the payment to the amateur of a penny? The word expenses has a
-well-defined and proper meaning, known to everybody. It represents the
-actual cost to a player of living, travelling, and playing, from the
-moment he leaves this country to the moment he sets foot in it again;
-but it is perfectly certain that, if left to the amateur to make a sort
-of private bargain, other and improper developments will take place,
-and it is notorious that they do.
-
-Now let us consider for a moment the position of affairs, as far as
-this question of amateurs and professionals is concerned, in the case
-of Australia. As was said before, there was some sort of discrimination
-between the two in the first Colonial eleven in 1878. Both the
-Bannermans, as noted above, were avowedly professionals, and Midwinter
-also, if I remember rightly, and perhaps one or two others. But the
-bulk were amateurs, and the mystic sign “Mr.” was placed before their
-names. If no authoritative statement is made, and no balance-sheet
-made public, nobody can be surprised if the facts are more or less
-conjectural. But for all that, rumour in this instance is no lying
-jade, and without fear of contradiction, I assert that many of the
-so-called Australian “amateurs” who have been to this country have made
-money over and above their expenses.[4] Let nobody be misled, or assume
-from this that any stigma attaches to any of these Australian players;
-it is not their fault, but some may complain of the system. The
-profession of a cricketer, the calling of a professional, is in every
-way an honourable and good one. What puzzles so many of us is that,
-this being the case, so many should adopt the profession, but deny the
-name. They seem to prefer the ambiguous position of a so-called amateur
-to the straightforward, far more honourable one of a professional. This
-is not the case in other professions. Take the case of the dramatic
-career. There are many actors and actresses of more or less high social
-standing who have been driven by their love of the work and skill to
-adopt the calling of an actor. There is no ambiguity about it. They
-become what they are. They do not call themselves amateurs and receive
-salaries under the guise of expenses, which is exactly what cricketers
-do; and many of us ask ourselves, what is the reason of this?
-
-To this question all that can be said is that circumstances have so
-changed that what was easy to define formerly is difficult now. It may
-be impossible to have the same rules and regulations now that used to
-exist forty years ago. But even if this is true, there can be no doubt
-that in these days a most unhealthy state of things prevails. It is
-bad for the nominal amateur, it is bad for the game, and it is bad for
-the country. Cricket is the finest game ever invented, but it is after
-all only a game, and it is wrong that things should have developed in
-such a way that amateurs become professionals in all but the name,
-and that gate-money should be the real moving spirit and ideal of all
-county clubs. To be prosperous financially a county must win matches,
-to win matches you must get the best possible county eleven, therefore
-the best amateurs as well as professionals must be played; and if these
-amateurs cannot afford the time and the money to play, why, then, they
-must be paid, and paid accordingly they are. That this is the case now
-everybody knows, and it seems strange that the greatest game of the
-world should be the one game where such things occur. No complaint need
-be made of the Australian system, except in this, that players who are
-in fact professionals should be treated as such. We are always glad to
-give them every welcome and show them every hospitality; nevertheless,
-they should have the same treatment and stand on the same footing that
-our professionals do when they visit Australia. In the same way, if any
-player feels himself unable, at the invitation of the M.C.C., to go out
-to Australia, because he is only offered the payment of the actual cost
-of travelling and living, and afterwards goes out under some private
-arrangement, he should be treated and recognised as a professional.
-It is an old proverb that you cannot eat your cake and have it, and
-if the modern amateur does not care, on social grounds, to become a
-professional, then let him honestly refuse to play cricket if he cannot
-afford to play on receipt of his bare expenses only. Richard Daft, in
-old days, found himself in the same dilemma, and grasped the nettle
-and became a professional, and justly earned the respect of all for so
-doing.
-
-Put briefly, in these days the state of things is this. A large number
-of amateurs directly and indirectly make something of a livelihood
-by cricket, and yet they are recognised as amateurs. Such cricketers
-are those who, under the guise of expenses, get such a sum that after
-paying these expenses leaves something to be carried over, as Mr.
-Jorrocks called it. A few others do things on a far more lordly scale.
-They have complimentary matches given them by their counties; in other
-words, they have benefits like many of the leading and deserving
-professionals, but still they are called amateurs; and whether it is
-correct to call a class of men one name, when they are obviously and
-openly something different, is perhaps a matter of opinion, but for my
-part I do not hesitate to say it is neither right nor straightforward.
-
-Further trouble arises from the curse of gate-money. This hangs like
-a blight over everything. County clubs dare not take a decided line
-about cricket reform, lest a shortening of the game might diminish the
-gate-money, and professionals do not speak out because they are forced
-to bow the knee to Baal. County clubs are therefore in this position:
-they must attract gates; to do this they must have a fine eleven; to
-get a fine eleven they must have amateurs, and these amateurs cannot
-play regularly without being paid, and so paid they are. The expenses
-of running a first-class county eleven are therefore very great—so
-great, in fact, that few can stand the strain. Some years ago we
-used to have three or four wet seasons running occasionally. If ever
-this occurs again, bankruptcy awaits several county committees, as
-Warwickshire and Worcestershire have some reason from last season’s
-experience to dread. It now costs as much to run a team of amateurs
-as professionals, as all have to be paid. Perhaps some day, when the
-public get tired of seeing match after match unfinished, and refuse
-to pay their entrance money, and the cricket world find out that some
-reform is necessary, and the duration of a match is two days and not
-three, county clubs will find out that they cannot pay these wages for
-amateurs, and a remedy will be found from an unlooked-for cause.
-
-[Illustration:
- _Attributed to_ _Thos. Gainsborough, R.A._
-_PORTRAIT OF A YOUTH._
-
-(_Said to be of George, Prince of Wales, afterwards George IV._)]
-
-[Illustration: _WILLIAM DORRINTON._]
-
-Having thus given vent to a growl on an unpleasant subject, the
-features of professional and amateur play may now be discussed. There
-used to be great differences in old days, far more than there is now,
-but in one respect there is a great difference still, and that is in
-bowling. We all know what sort of bowling will be seen in a University
-match, or in Free Forester and Quidnunc matches. There will be one or
-two fair slow bowlers, but that is all. Good fast bowling has not been
-seen for some years in amateur elevens, but for this the amateurs are
-hardly to blame. The modern wicket, shaved and heavy rolled, has made
-it practically impossible for any really fast bowler to do any good,
-unless he is one of the shining lights, like Richardson or Lockwood.
-Amateurs like Messrs. Jessop, Kortright, and Bradley have an occasional
-day of success, but these bowlers, being naturally fast, depend mainly
-for their success on the agility of the field in the slips, and on
-their capacity to make the ball bump. To attain this they generally
-have but a short career. They take out of themselves by adopting a
-gigantic long run and banging the ball down from straight over their
-head at a terrific pace. Flesh and blood cannot stand this for more
-than a short time. A human being is but human after all; he is not a
-machine built to order like a steam engine, and work like what he has
-to undergo knocks him up. The professionals have always had much the
-best of it as regards bowling, and they have so still; but why this is
-so is not easy to see. Between the ages of twelve and eighteen there is
-no reason to suppose that the professional practises more at bowling
-than the amateur; the probability is the other way. A young amateur
-is at school during this period, where cricket is more systematically
-carried on than at the board school, which the professional leaves at
-thirteen and exchanges for a shop or a factory. But the tendency in
-amateur bowlers is to promise well as a boy, and not to come up to
-expectations as a man, and especially is this the case when, as so
-often happens, there is a corresponding improvement in batting.
-
-In my experience of more than thirty years, the only instance I
-can call to mind of an amateur who bowled above medium pace like a
-professional—that is to say, with a professional’s accuracy and
-method—was Mr. Appleby, who died last year. Mr. Appleby had a
-beautiful easy action, and was always to be relied on to keep a length
-and direction, as J. T. Hearne did for many years. Mr. Jackson is still
-in the middle of his career, and next to Mr. Appleby, bowls more nearly
-approaching to the professional standpoint; but, good bowler as he
-is, he does not strike one as quite like a professional bowler. Slow
-bowlers are not quite in the same class. Here the amateur is more at
-home. Mr. W. G. Grace and the late Mr. David Buchanan were worthy of
-being classed with Alfred Shaw, Peate, and Rhodes. Mr. Grace must be
-so much used to hearing his merits discussed entirely from the batting
-point of view, and has done so little bowling as compared with batting,
-that it may interest the present generation that for some years as
-a bowler he was as effective as the best professional. His method,
-however, was very different. At a time when a wicket was supposed to
-be worth only ten runs, and when nearly every bowler bowled more for
-maidens than they do now, Mr. Grace was the first to show the way of
-a deliberate system of getting wickets by getting men out, other than
-by merely bowling them. He habitually placed a deep square leg in the
-right place, and tempted men like Oscroft, Charlwood, and many more to
-send chances there, and many a time and oft has the trick come off. He
-frequently bowled in a way that showed what idea was in his head. A
-very common device of his was in regard to l.b.w. He never objected to
-being hit over the ropes, as he would silently argue that an ordinary
-batsman, having once tasted the sweets of a mighty leg hit over the
-ropes, would very much like to repeat the feat, and Mr. Grace would
-drop down a tempting ball on the leg stump, and if, as often happened,
-the batsman did hit at it and did miss it, he was out l.b.w. To this
-day, to batsmen like those who come from Australia for the first time,
-and have therefore never seen Mr. Grace bowl, I would as soon put on
-Mr. Grace to bowl for a few overs as any man in England. He is and
-always has been quite unlike any other bowler, both in the way he
-delivered the ball and the strange way he placed his field.
-
-Mr. Buchanan was another bowler who copied Mr. Grace in one sense, for
-though he did not bowl for catches to leg, he carried out the theory
-of bowling for catches on the off side more than any bowler before or
-since. A bold hitter might hit Mr. Buchanan, if he was quick on his
-feet and had a good eye, but for all that there were few bowlers who so
-rarely bowled a bad-length ball. Neither were there many bowlers who
-made such absolute fools of batsmen as Mr. Buchanan did. The picked
-professionals who played against him in Gentlemen and Players matches
-at Lord’s and the Oval as a rule displayed all the feebleness that
-was possible. Daft, Lockwood, and Oscroft were exceptions to this.
-Lockwood, who had a wonderful cut, more than any other, realised the
-danger of hitting at the pitch of Mr. Buchanan’s off ball. Instead of
-doing this, he got back and cut the ball behind the wicket for three
-runs—it might have been four, but Lockwood was a slow runner. Mr.
-Buchanan did not like to have a third man, and his nervous system was
-seriously insulted at Lockwood’s method, which forced him to change the
-disposition of his field in a way he did not like. Mr. Grace and Mr.
-Buchanan were two amateur slow bowlers who really studied the art of
-bowling, and both of them, Mr. Grace in particular, studied the play of
-their batting opponents; but when you have mentioned Messrs. Appleby,
-Grace, and Buchanan, and for a short time Mr. Steel, you have nearly
-exhausted the list of bowlers who during the last thirty years may be
-said to have challenged comparison with the best professionals.
-
-In batting it is very different. Mr. Grace, of course, must be
-left out of any calculation. Apart from him, however, the amateurs
-can quite hold their own in batting. It is not fair to take as an
-illustration the performances of each in Gentlemen _v._ Players
-matches, because the bowling on one side is so superior to the other.
-But in international test matches, both here and in Australia, Messrs.
-Stoddart, Ranjitsinhji, Maclaren, Jackson, and Steel have been fully
-as good and successful as Shrewsbury, Barnes, Gunn, Hayward, and
-Tyldesley. As far as style is concerned, the older professionals, such
-as Shrewsbury and Barnes, had a more distinctive difference of method
-than their modern successors. Hayward and Tyldesley far more closely
-resembled the amateur method of Messrs. Jackson and Palairet than
-Shrewsbury and Barnes did that of Messrs. Steel and Stoddart. It is
-not easy to explain on paper the difference, but every decent judge of
-the game could see that a difference was there. Some of the players,
-like Ulyett and Bates, could and did hit as hard and as often as the
-amateur, but in the professional there was little real grace of style.
-It is strange that this is so, for grace and ease are qualities that
-must be born, not made, but it is true, nevertheless, speaking of the
-older cricketers. Nowadays it would seem that Tyldesley and Hayward
-have nothing to fear, as far as style is concerned, from any amateur,
-always excepting Mr. Palairet. As far as mere run-getting is the point
-of discussion, there would seem to be very little in it one way or the
-other. In the great series of test matches, both here and in Australia,
-during the last ten years there have been Stoddart, Maclaren,
-Ranjitsinhji, and Jackson, as there have been Shrewsbury, Hayward,
-Tyldesley, and Gunn, the amateurs perhaps having a shade the better of
-it.
-
-The fielding also is and always has been tolerably even. In this,
-however, there is a great difference now as compared with old times.
-Thirty years ago the professional wicket-keeper was a class, even two
-classes, above the amateur. Lockyer, Pooley, Plumb, and Pinder formed
-a class that the amateurs could not show any comparison with. Possibly
-the rougher wicket and the, generally speaking, faster bowling made the
-position more unpleasant than it is now, but undoubtedly the amateur
-has improved beyond all knowledge in wicket-keeping, and there is not
-much to choose now. In other respects also the quality seems tolerably
-equal. The observer will undoubtedly notice a change in the figure
-of the ordinary professional now. The old Yorkshire eleven, with the
-well-known figures of Roger Iddison, Luke Greenwood, and Rowbotham, and
-the Nottingham eleven with Bignall and Wild, seem quite out of date
-now, though Hirst looks promising in this respect. But Gunn, Maurice
-Read, Tyldesley, Wainwright, Hirst, Braund, and several others were
-and are fully equal in fielding to any that the amateurs can bring to
-compare with them.
-
-It would appear, then, that in batting and fielding there is little
-to choose between amateurs and professionals, but in bowling there is
-great superiority among the professionals. Of course this superiority,
-_cæteris paribus_, is so important that as long as it exists the
-professional must win the vast majority of matches. As a general rule
-this has been the case, but when Mr. Grace was in his prime, that is,
-between 1869 and about 1887, his tremendous skill gave the amateurs the
-predominance that, as far as appearances go, does not look likely to
-occur again.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _W. Bromley._
-_GEORGE PARR._]
-
-Some good judges of the game have maintained that the common practice,
-which has prevailed for some time, of engaging professional bowlers
-to bowl to boys at school and undergraduates at the universities,
-and to the amateurs generally belonging to clubs, is a bad one, and
-that amateur inferiority in bowling is to be traced to this custom.
-Something no doubt may be done by practising bowling, but it is
-probable that the bowler even more than the batsman is _nascitur non
-fit_. Unless there is a natural break and some spin or mysterious
-quality which makes the ball hang or kick in a bowler, he can hardly
-acquire it. The utmost he can attain to, if he does not possess these
-virtues, is experience in estimating the quality of his opponents, and
-a modicum of skill in varying length and pace. But these will not avail
-him much if the natural gifts of a bowler are not in him by nature.
-Even these will go if, as frequently happens in these days of easy
-wickets, the bowler gets too much work thrown on him, for the cricket
-life of a very fast bowler is not more than six years on the average.
-
-In the matter of generalship, or the managing of a side, professionals
-have hitherto shown very little skill. The professionals themselves
-would probably prefer to be led by an amateur. George Parr, Daft,
-Emmett, Alfred Shaw, and Abel have at different times acted as
-captains, but none are to be compared to Messrs. V. E. Walker, A. N.
-Hornby, J. Shuter, and Maclaren. A professional who is captain seems
-always to think it proper to give every bowler a chance, whether a
-change of bowling is wanted or not, and a natural bias towards members
-of his own county is not always successfully resisted.
-
-From what has been said in this chapter, the reader will be able to
-learn that, as far as England is concerned, the relations between
-amateurs and professionals stand on an altogether different footing in
-cricket from what they do in other games. In Australia, unless we have
-been misinformed, most if not all the players who come to this country
-earn, on an average of years, a fairly substantial sum by cricket
-played over here. They are really professionals, and it is probable
-that in their own country they are so regarded. If this is so, we have
-the curious fact of a totally different standard prevailing in the two
-countries. But this, as far as England is concerned, is not important.
-What is important is that there should be some distinct understanding
-on the subject, and the present nebulous state of things put an end to.
-If it is necessary to have something paid to amateurs, the greatest
-care should be taken that nothing beyond _bona fide_ expenses are paid,
-and we believe that by the Surrey club this is done now. Not until
-there is established some clear and understood principle under which a
-true definition of the word “amateur” is arrived at, will the present
-unsatisfactory state of things be put an end to, and it is earnestly to
-be hoped that some day this will be done.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER VIII
-
-EARLIER AUSTRALIAN CRICKET
-
-By the EARL OF DARNLEY
-
-
-The rivalry between English and Australian cricketers, which has been
-productive in recent times of so many splendid matches, can now look
-back to its starting-point through quite a respectably large number of
-years.
-
-In the year 1861 H. H. Stephenson captained the first English team
-of cricketers which visited Australia, and it was seventeen years
-later before the seeds then sown had sufficiently matured to allow
-the Australians to feel full confidence in their powers to return the
-compliment, and to try conclusions with English players on their own
-grounds.
-
-Between these dates, 1861 and 1878, three other English elevens
-visited Australia—G. Parr’s in 1863, W. G. Grace’s in 1873, and J.
-Lillywhite’s in 1876. Of these four elevens, three were almost wholly
-made up of professional players, and the fourth, that captained by
-“W. G.,” included five amateurs. Amongst their numbers, however, they
-included most of the great players of the day, and the first and
-second elevens in point of date each left behind in Australia one of
-its members, whose coaching was invaluable to the rising generation of
-Colonial players: these two instructors were C. Lawrence, who remained
-from the first English eleven, and W. Caffyn, about the best all-round
-man of his time, from the second. Many times has the writer heard
-striking testimony offered in Australia to the invaluable help given by
-these two cricketers in those early days, and certainly they might well
-have felt proud of the aptitude of such of their pupils as have come to
-us from 1878 onwards.
-
-The matches in these first four English visits have no very special
-points of interest, as they were almost invariably played against
-considerable odds. It was, however, plain to all that the standard
-of cricket in Australia was greatly improving year by year, and no
-one was surprised when it was announced in 1878 that our friends felt
-themselves strong enough to send their first eleven to England, to try
-their fortunes on level terms. So many Australian elevens have come
-and gone since then, that it is difficult now to imagine the intense
-interest and excitement which was felt in English cricket circles at
-this epoch-making event. The arrival of an eleven which might hold its
-own against our best men was up to this time so wildly improbable an
-eventuality, that the majority of the English cricketing public could
-hardly be brought to believe in its possibility.
-
-A very short time sufficed to show that there was no mistake about
-the capacity of our visitors for holding their own with our best men
-on even terms. After a moderate start at Nottingham, where the county
-won by one innings and a few runs, came perhaps the most startlingly
-dramatic match ever played by an Australian eleven in England, against
-a strong selection of the Marylebone Club, including such well-known
-performers as W. G. Grace, Hornby, Ridley, A. J. Webbe, A. Shaw, and
-Morley. To dispose of such a side for 33 and 19, and win the match by
-nine wickets in one day, was a feat that even the warmest admirers of
-the Australians had hardly imagined, and from that memorable day may be
-said to have begun that intensely keen and interesting rivalry that has
-lasted right up to the present day.
-
-It may be worth while to attempt some slight personal sketch of this
-remarkable 1878 Australian eleven, which included several players who
-were to be the backbone of future elevens, and which achieved its
-successes in some measure by methods to which we in England were as yet
-strangers.
-
-On looking through their batting list, there are names which suggest
-plentiful run-getting capabilities. As a matter of fact, however, at
-that time the batting was, with one exception, C. Bannerman, of the
-most rugged and unfinished description. The above-named exception,
-Bannerman, might well have been given a high place among contemporary
-batsmen as a fierce-hitting, powerful player, worthy of any eleven for
-batting alone, but Blackham, Midwinter, Horan, Murdoch, A. Bannerman,
-and Garrett had none of them yet acquired the powers which in after
-years were to be theirs in such abundant measure, and the batting of
-the whole side, after C. Bannerman, was distinctly of the rough, useful
-order. In this connection it may be noticed, however, that although
-finish was to be looked for in vain, even at this early stage was
-evident that fearless and dogged resistance to adverse circumstances
-which has since then successfully extricated many an Australian side
-from a tight place, and has always given their adversaries that
-uncomfortable feeling of never being quite certain that they have
-really got them safely beaten. What an invaluable asset is a reputation
-of this sort, and how well and consistently have our Australian friends
-sustained this hardly-earned character!
-
-Emphatically this was a bowling and fielding eleven. In nineteen
-eleven-a-side matches, only twice was the 250 exceeded by their
-opponents, a convincing record that speaks for itself. Of the four
-bowlers, one great name stands out supreme, and who is there that
-remembers that year and the ten or twelve that succeeded it, but
-must confess that his whole ideas of bowling were revolutionised
-by what he saw of Spofforth in the prime of his powers? With
-physical qualifications admirably adapted to fast bowling, very
-tall, long-limbed, active, wiry, and impossible to tire, Spofforth
-had scientifically studied the art of bowling to a most unusual
-degree. The hard, true wickets in Australia had even then begun to
-exercise a decisive influence on the characteristics of bowling in
-that country, and unless a bowler could develop quite exceptional
-powers of deception, spin, and break, he was soon reduced to absolute
-helplessness. This difference in climate may be said to be the one
-element which makes a distinction between cricket as played in the
-Colonies and cricket as played in England, and, while its influence
-has been decisive in keeping up the standard of Australian bowling to
-a very high pitch of excellence, it has been at the same time hardly
-less favourable to the formation of a free and good style of batting, a
-style far more difficult to acquire when the ground is unreliable and
-the climate variable.
-
-At that time Spofforth’s methods varied considerably from those which
-he afterwards employed. He was then as a rule a fast, sometimes
-terrifically fast, bowler, with occasional slow ones, the change of
-pace being most admirably masked in the delivery. In after years his
-average pace was rather over medium, with an unusually big break back
-for that pace, while the very fast or very slow ones were the exception
-and not the rule. In addition to these types of ball, no man ever
-bowled a more dangerous fast yorker than Spofforth, and his armoury
-may well be said to have contained as damaging a collection of weapons
-as ever taxed the powers of an opposing batsman. Boyle, Allan, and
-Garrett made up the bowling strength. Of these Allan, partly probably
-through being the possessor of a constitution which suffered greatly
-from the severities of our summer climate, never came out in his true
-form; his bowling had a fine natural break, and swerved considerably
-in the air, and, although not on the whole very successful, he
-occasionally showed quite enough of his powers to warrant the great
-reputation enjoyed by him in the Colonies. Both Boyle and Garrett
-were extremely useful bowlers of the good-length-lasting style, which
-carried them through many subsequent years of good performance.
-
-In wicket-keeping again did English cricketers find that there was
-something new to be learnt. Both Blackham and Murdoch showed for the
-first time how perfectly possible it was to stand up to the fastest
-bowling without a long-stop; and Blackham especially gave promise of
-powers that were to make him for some years perhaps the most brilliant
-wicket-keeper ever seen.
-
-The fielding all round and throwing were unusually good, and climate
-again may probably be answerable for the fact that Australian elevens,
-taken all through, could almost invariably out-throw any English eleven
-man for man.
-
-[Illustration: _THOMAS BOX._]
-
-From this short description it will easily be seen that they were a
-team to be seriously reckoned with, whoever their opponents might
-be, and when we look to the completed records of their matches, the
-result must be held to be decidedly creditable. By comparison with the
-programmes of after years, the relative test of their powers can hardly
-be said to be so severe. No really representative English eleven was
-encountered, although the full strength of both the amateurs and the
-professionals was played separately. At the hands of the Gentlemen they
-met with one of their heaviest reverses, but the professionals were
-narrowly defeated once, while the other game ended in a fairly even
-draw.
-
-Nineteen matches played, of which the Australians won ten and lost
-four, made up a highly satisfactory total, and, in addition, only three
-out of twenty-one matches against odds were lost by them.
-
-It was not a batsman’s year, 1878, but even taking that fact into
-consideration, only one innings of over 100 hit against Australian
-bowling shows unmistakably wherein lay the chief strength of the
-eleven. Mention has already been made of the remarkable wicket-keeping
-of Murdoch and Blackham, who for the first time in English cricket
-performed their duties without the aid of a long-stop. We think we are
-right in saying that Murdoch was at first looked upon as the regular
-wicket-keeper of the team, but from that time onward the wonderful
-talent of Blackham gained for him the superior position, and his
-wicket-keeping for several years was at least the equal of that of any
-other competitor that could be brought against him. Standing very close
-to the wicket, and of marvellous quickness, he had the happy knack of
-invariably showing at his best on great occasions; a batsman too of
-a resolute, fearless description, and a very quick runner between
-wickets, his play in Australian elevens for many years was no small
-factor in their success.
-
-The composition of this eleven is of especial interest, not merely
-because it was the first of the series to come to us, but by reason of
-its including some prominent names of men who were to be the nucleus
-and backbone of those that were to follow. Blackham, Murdoch, A.
-Bannerman, Garrett, Boyle, and Spofforth are names that will frequently
-recur in following years, and we shall see how, with their help, the
-standard of success rose consistently through the tours of 1880 and
-1882, and then, after a slight falling-off in 1884, for reasons which
-will afterwards be alluded to, fell gradually away until a revival set
-in about the time of Stoddart’s first tour in Australia in 1894.
-
-The next event of any prominence to be noticed is the visit of Lord
-Harris’s eleven to Australia in the winter of this same year 1878. A
-fine batting and fielding eleven, but hardly strong enough in bowling
-to be really representative of English cricket at its best. Emmett and
-Ulyett were the only two professionals included, and for a side so weak
-in bowling, they may be said to have made an excellent appearance. One
-match only was played against the returned Australian eleven, who were
-successful by ten wickets. Four new names appear amongst those chosen
-to represent the various Australian sides, all more or less successful,
-Palmer, Macdonnell, Massie, and Evans. The last-named cricketer was
-about that time at his best, and many and outspoken have been the
-regrets that this fine cricketer could never spare the time to appear
-much in English _v._ Australian cricket until he was well past his
-prime. In both appearance and performance he was thoroughly typical of
-the highest class of colonial cricketer. His tall, unusually active,
-well-built figure, bearded, bronzed bushman’s face, presented the most
-perfect example of the Australian athlete, while his overhand accurate
-bowling and really splendid fielding and steady batting made him a
-worthy addition to any eleven.
-
-Against the representatives of the individual colonies the Englishmen
-more than held their own, and six matches won to three lost make up a
-highly creditable record.
-
-In the summer of 1880 appeared the second Australian eleven, and
-amongst their number several additional names to those who were with us
-in 1878.
-
-Palmer, whose performance against Lord Harris’s eleven made his
-inclusion a certainty, appears for the first time, and he has more than
-justified his selection by coming out top of the bowling averages in
-eleven-a-side matches, according to number of wickets taken, although
-Spofforth, who was unable to play in several matches, has the lesser
-average of runs per wicket. No prettier bowler to look at than Palmer
-ever bowled a ball; a style of delivery that apparently cost its owner
-no effort whatever, and, as usual with great Australian bowlers, a much
-greater break than the pace of the ball would lead you to suspect.
-Strong and sturdily built, his power of bowling a very fast yorker was
-unusually great, and was frequently used early in a batsman’s innings
-with deadly effect. With such an easy delivery, it is not easy to see
-why Palmer’s successes did not continue for much longer than they
-actually did, but we may probably look for the explanation in a too
-great fondness which he subsequently developed for the fast leg breaks,
-which first destroyed the excellent length for which he was famous,
-and finally lowered the standard of his bowling altogether. The great
-improvement in his batting powers may possibly also in his case, as in
-that of many other bowlers, have had something to do with it. His style
-in batting was almost as attractively graceful as that of his bowling,
-but lacked something of that tenacity which must be added to style to
-bring about the real power over the bowlers characteristic of a great
-batsman.
-
-The name of Macdonnell recalls many a dashing, vigorous innings,
-perhaps some of the most fascinating displays of hard, but not usually
-high, hitting ever seen. This season of 1880 saw him already among
-the leading batsmen, with an average in eleven-a-side matches second
-only to Murdoch, whose immense improvement as a bat deserves separate
-mention. Macdonnell belongs to that small circle of Australian players
-who were able by the fierceness of their hitting to practically win
-a match by their own unaided efforts when their companions were
-comparatively helpless, and this type of batsman, which was one of
-the chief features of every Australian eleven up to 1893, seems,
-curiously enough, to have almost disappeared. We may not improbably
-be able to trace this to the great predominant influence which has
-altered the whole character of modern cricket, and, in the judgment
-of many, brought about a dull level of too easily performed feats
-of run-getting, that only drastic legislation can alter, viz. the
-increasing excellence of the artificially prepared wickets. The value
-of an exceptional hitter, such as any member of the little band above
-alluded to, is far greater when the conditions are difficult. He alone
-perhaps can offer any effective resistance when the bowler is revelling
-in favourable conditions; but, if the ball comes along easily and well,
-it pays far better to determine at all costs to keep up the wicket, to
-abandon the more attractive methods of the hitter, and let the runs
-come, as they almost inevitably will come under such circumstances.
-
-A great feature of the cricket of this year was the immense improvement
-noticeable in Murdoch’s play; from this time forward he took rank as
-one of the greatest batsmen of the time, and perhaps the best of all
-the Australian players that have come to us. It is gratifying to see
-that, as in the case of our own champion, the ever-vigorous “W. G.,”
-Murdoch’s perfect upright style has enabled him to keep up a more than
-respectable proportion of his best form through at least twenty-five
-years of first-class cricket. This very day in April 1903, the morning
-paper tells us that, snow-showers and north winds notwithstanding,
-these two grand old cricketers are once more making an excellent
-appearance, going in first together at Kennington Oval. Long may they
-flourish! Another name that strikes us as appearing for the first
-time in these matches is that of G. Bonnor. We have already noticed
-the athletic and powerful frames that help our Australian friends so
-frequently to distinction in cricket, but how can we sufficiently
-admire the really magnificent physique of this giant among cricketers!
-6 feet 6 inches in height and between 16 and 17 stones in weight, a
-very fast runner and prodigious thrower, we might well search the
-country through before we find his match as a splendid specimen of
-humanity. Let the reader think over all the men of at all similar
-proportions that he has ever met with, and see which of them could
-run at full speed and pick up a ball in the long field as he could.
-In so big a man this great activity implies a perfection of muscular
-development and proportion that is very rarely met with, and to see
-Bonnor hit and field at cricket may without exaggeration be described
-as the realisation of an almost ideal athletic experience.
-
-There have been endless discussions as to who has been actually the
-biggest hitter at cricket within living memory, but in the writer’s
-mind there is no doubt that Bonnor’s extra power gave him the first
-place for distance, although C. I. Thornton’s much more perfect swing
-made the competition a closer race than their relative physical powers
-would lead one to expect. Bonnor, Macdonnell, Massie, Lyons—what
-prodigious smacks to the unfortunate ball do these names bring to our
-recollection! It will be indeed a bad day for the old game when the
-conditions do not give reasonable encouragement to this heroic type of
-batsman, and, at all events while Jessop continues to play, we may well
-hope that there is no immediate danger of the race becoming extinct.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting by_ _A. S. Wortley._
-_DR. W. G. GRACE._]
-
-Taken as a whole, the team showed a decided advance on their
-predecessors, and Murdoch and Macdonnell in particular gave many fine
-displays of batting. The bowling suffered from the absence of Garrett,
-and the failure of any adequate substitute to take his place, and also
-from Spofforth’s absence in half the eleven-a-side matches. When he was
-able to play, however, his bowling was as irresistible as ever, while
-Palmer at once worked his way into the front rank of bowlers.
-
-A new departure in the programme was made in the match against a picked
-England eleven played rather too late in the year, on 6th September.
-The weather, however, was all that could be wished at that time, and
-a great match resulted in a well-deserved win for England by five
-wickets. Murdoch and W. G. Grace were fittingly the batting heroes of
-the match, and the time was evidently at hand when the best English
-eleven would find its equal in our rapidly improving Australian
-friends. Only four matches lost out of thirty-seven played was the
-final result, although only eleven of these were eleven-a-side matches,
-and the programme did not provide the sterner test of later tours.
-
-In the winter of 1881 a very strong professional eleven under the
-captaincy of Alfred Shaw played a short round of first-class matches in
-Australia, and amongst these were two matches against Australia and two
-against the Australian eleven which was to come to England in 1882. The
-two Australian sides consisted of practically the same players, except
-that Evans was not included in the team to visit England. So strong,
-however, was that team that it is difficult to say who could have been
-advisedly left out to make a place for him.
-
-The results of these four matches clearly indicated the great strength
-of Australian cricket at this time. Two wins and two drawn games
-against a side which had Barlow, Ulyett, Selby, Bates, Shrewsbury,
-Midwinter, and Scotton to bat, and Peate, A. Shaw, Barlow, Bates,
-Ulyett, and Emmett to bowl, was a thoroughly unmistakable performance,
-and added immensely to the interest with which the arrival of the 1882
-Australian eleven was anticipated. No absolutely new names had appeared
-on the colonial side, but the standard of play had everywhere made
-a distinct upward movement, and almost every man of the eleven had
-reached the prime of his powers. An opportune alteration of the match
-list for that year provided eleven-a-side matches throughout the tour,
-a better test, and one likely to keep up the interest and play of the
-men more efficiently than a number of matches against odds, which are
-no particular honour to win or disgrace to lose.
-
-A glance at the composition of this famous eleven shows a collection
-of very well distributed powers. For batting, Murdoch, now at his
-best—and that means no small praise; Horan, a talented, correct
-player, who, although not very successful with the first eleven, was
-now one of the best in Australia; Massie, Bannerman, Bonnor, Giffen,
-greatly improved, and soon to be one of the best all-round players of
-the day; Macdonnell, Blackham, and S. Jones. In bowling, Spofforth,
-Palmer, Boyle, Garrett, and Giffen—probably as good a company as ever
-bowled together in one eleven. Blackham to keep wicket. No wonder that
-the cricket critics, whose numbers were rapidly increasing, have never
-ceased to dispute whether this eleven or one of those that have come to
-us since 1896 was the stronger.
-
-Unquestionably from 1884 to 1894 the Australian form steadily declined,
-but whether the improvement that has since set in has reached or passed
-the level of 1882 and 1884, is a question of considerable difficulty to
-tackle, and has moreover this recommendation, so thoroughly favourable
-to the pronouncement of varied and strongly-laid-down opinions, that
-from the conditions of the problem it is impossible that the issue can
-ever be really conclusive. Whatever may be the reader’s verdict on this
-vexed point, no one can deny that few elevens have ever contained so
-many brilliant performers in their own departments of the game.
-
-The days of a series of test matches had not yet arrived, although
-efforts were even then made by those arranging matters to fix dates
-for them. Some more years of hammering against the gates of cricket
-conservatism were necessary before this most palpably necessary
-improvement was instituted.
-
-The one England match was as usual fixed very late in the season, 28th
-August, and for the first time an ever-memorable contest resulted
-in a narrow win for Australia by 7 runs. Two very fine elevens
-fought it out on difficult wickets, and in the end England failed to
-score the 84 that was required of them by the above-mentioned small
-margin. Spofforth’s bowling fourteen wickets for 90 runs stands out
-conspicuously, but, for so important a trial of strength, what a pity
-that wicket conditions should have rendered such figures possible!
-
-It was curious that, out of four matches lost during the whole tour,
-two were against Cambridge University and Cambridge Past and Present.
-The other two defeats were at the hands of the Players and the North
-of England, and these four defeats make a very small total when placed
-against twenty-three victories out of a long series of thirty-eight
-matches, while the average strength of the opposing elevens was far in
-excess of anything previously met with.
-
-The winter of 1882 saw a mixed team of amateurs and professionals,
-under captaincy of the present writer, start for a tour in Australia.
-The all-round strength of the side was very considerable, but only
-four of their number had been chosen to represent England in the
-previous summer. However, as the remainder included Morley, Bates, W.
-W. Read, and Tylecote, the paper form was undoubtedly strong, and
-had not illness and accident, especially the unfortunate mishap which
-more or less crippled Morley, their only first-class fast bowler, been
-unfortunately frequent, an even better record than the respectable
-results achieved might have been realised. A rubber of three matches
-was played with the victorious 1882 Australian eleven, and after each
-had easily won a match, the decisive game ended at Sydney in the
-victory of England by 69 runs.
-
-Cricket enthusiasm was at a very high pitch in Australia at this time,
-the first victory of Australia over England having greatly excited
-the public mind, and the attendance at the test matches exceeded all
-previous records.
-
-The rubber having now been won by England, a suggestion was made that
-another match should be arranged, and one or two players included in
-the Australian side who had not been to England with Murdoch. Evans
-and Midwinter were accordingly chosen to take the places of Garrett
-and Macdonnell, and, although it seemed highly doubtful if this change
-was calculated to be for the better, its advocates would doubtless
-claim the justification of their choice in the Australian victory which
-resulted by four wickets. Fifty-five thousand people were supposed to
-have witnessed the play during the four days that the match occupied,
-and a new plan was adopted of having a fresh wicket for each of the
-four innings. This was necessitated by the peculiar nature of the
-Sydney turf, a thick-bladed, flat-growing grass, which looked perfectly
-smooth, but wore very badly.
-
-These four matches showed the Australians hardly perhaps in their best
-form, but Bonnor, Bannerman, and, in the last match, Blackham, did some
-excellent service in batting, especially the first-named. His hitting
-in three out of the four matches was terrific, and most difficult to
-deal with, as our English eyes were not so well able, in the very clear
-atmosphere of these latitudes, to judge the many high twisting catches
-which he impartially presented to various fieldsmen. In an innings of
-87 in the fourth match he was supposed to have been missed eight or ten
-times, and several of these misses were to be laid to the charge of a
-usually very safe fieldsman who shall be nameless. The demoralising
-effect of such a succession of disasters on our bowlers and fieldsmen
-may be well imagined, and the problem of how long a bowler should
-be kept on who is having a chance missed off him nearly every over
-presented itself in its most perplexing form to our captain.
-
-The Australian bowling as usual found itself in safe and capable hands,
-in the persons of Spofforth, Palmer, Boyle, etc., while the Australian
-summer supplied us with an unusual number of wet wickets, much to the
-delight of the sheep-farmers who came from all parts of Australia to
-see the games.
-
-On the English side Steel proved a tower of strength in both bowling
-and batting, and Leslie, Barlow, Bates, and Read all well upheld their
-batting reputations. Of the bowlers, Barlow and Bates did about the
-best work, and the latter performed one or two notable feats in this
-line. The want of a reliable fast bowler was many a time sorely felt,
-poor Morley, who attempted to play several matches with a broken rib,
-breaking down time after time.
-
-For the first time Queensland was visited by an English eleven, but the
-experience, in spite of the extraordinary hospitality and kindness of
-the Queenslanders, was not altogether encouraging. The semi-tropical
-heat caused several slight cases of sun effects amongst our players,
-and the drenching thundershowers necessitated, in one case, small
-drains being dug quite near the pitch to allow the water to subside
-quickly after the storms.
-
-Cricket touring in Australia in those days differed from more modern
-experiences in several respects. The railways between Adelaide and
-Melbourne and Melbourne and Queensland had not yet been completed, so
-that most disturbing little sea journeys, lasting about thirty-six
-hours, on small and not overclean steamers, had to be undertaken on
-several occasions. Nothing more calculated to temporarily disarrange
-the health and form of a travelling cricket eleven could be well
-imagined, and the railway journeys which have now been substituted must
-be far preferable, from the player’s point of view.
-
-The cricket grounds in the chief capitals were already very good, but
-in Adelaide the turf had been too recently laid to have nearly reached
-the perfection to which it afterwards attained. In Sydney, the species
-of grass which has been before alluded to has now, we believe, been
-altered to English grass, then supposed to be quite unsuited to the
-climate, with the best possible results.
-
-No new players of any prominence appeared among the Australians, unless
-we make an exception in the case of W. H. Cooper, the Victorian. He had
-already played in first-class cricket for some years, and had made a
-considerable reputation by his wonderful leg breaks. The usual penalty
-attaching to this great power of twist, viz. loss of pitch, always
-made him a very doubtful quantity, and he was liable to be ruinously
-expensive in the matter of runs.
-
-The arrival of an Australian eleven in England every second year had
-now become quite an established custom, and 1884 saw a strong selection
-of players once more with us. The changes in the personnel proved to be
-the substitution of Scott, Midwinter, Alexander, and Cooper for Horan,
-Massie, S. Jones, and Garrett, and there can hardly be a contrary
-opinion that this change was slightly for the worse. Scott certainly
-sustained his own part with considerable success, but the displaced
-four names proved in the long run to be very difficult to replace
-adequately.
-
-Three matches with England produced the not very satisfactory result
-of two drawn games and one win for England, a foretaste of the
-indecisive sequences which have stirred up the attempts at legislative
-interference in later times. Although unable to win one of the three
-matches, the Australians had certainly rather the best of the two that
-were undecided. In the first match, at Manchester, England was only
-93 runs on with one wicket to fall, after a first innings of 182; and
-in the third match, at the Oval, they gave us a very fine display
-of batting, winning the toss and making 551, the largest total yet
-recorded in these matches.
-
-[Illustration: _YOUTH WITH A CRICKET BAT_
-(_Supposed to have been Painted about 1780_).]
-
-Murdoch, true to his character of leading batsman, headed the list
-with 211, Macdonnell 103, and Scott 102, while the English bowling was
-reduced to such straits that Alfred Lyttelton’s lobs were afforded the
-chance of a lifetime, and actually captured the last four wickets for
-19 runs!
-
-When in the first innings eight English wickets had fallen for 181 runs
-on a good wicket, the match looked almost over, but with W. W. Read’s
-appearance began a notable partnership, which was not broken before 151
-runs had been added to the score. Read’s 117 ranks very high indeed
-among the great innings of great matches, and his mastery of the varied
-and excellent bowling brought against him was complete. Two wickets
-down for 85 runs represented England’s second innings, and Australia
-could claim an immense advantage on the match as far as it went.
-
-The third match, at Lord’s, ended in quite another fashion with a
-one-innings defeat for Australia, principally due to a very fine 148
-by A. G. Steel for England, and some excellent bowling by the two
-Yorkshiremen, Peate and Ulyett.
-
-The English representative eleven of the day showed a very high
-standard of play, especially in batting. When one finds A. Lyttelton
-going in ninth on the list of batsmen, and W. W. Read tenth, the side
-may be safely estimated to be as strong in batting as any that has ever
-played together. The bowling, on the other hand, did not stand out in
-quite such overwhelming strength, although Peate, Ulyett, A. G. Steel,
-Barnes, and Barlow are a by no means contemptible selection. On the
-whole year’s performances in batting, Murdoch once more emphasised his
-superiority, with an average of 30 per innings, 1.7 in advance of his
-next competitor, while most of the older hands, in addition to Scott,
-came out on the list with good figures.
-
-Spofforth’s bowling was if possible even more successful than
-before—216 wickets, with an average of 12 runs per wicket; with Palmer
-second, with 132 wickets for an average of 16 runs. These two, with
-Boyle and Giffen, made up an attack strong at all points.
-
-Eighteen matches won and seven lost does not compare too favourably
-with the figures of the 1882 eleven, and this difference was, we think,
-exactly to be accounted for by the slight change for the worse in the
-alteration made in the old eleven by the substitution of the four new
-men before alluded to.
-
-Although their successes had possibly not quite equalled those of 1882,
-the four players who had not been able to come to England were still
-in as good form as ever, and Australian cricket at this time was still
-at about its highest point. No real symptoms of that gradual decline
-which lasted up to 1894 had commenced to show themselves before about
-1885-86.
-
-In the winter of 1884 another strong lot of professionals under
-Alfred Shaw visited Australia, and an unfortunate dispute with the
-lately-returned Australian eleven deprived most of the chief matches of
-their representative character, as the members of the Australian eleven
-refused to play in them. However, towards the end of the tour matters
-were smoothed over, and three matches were played against Australia’s
-full strength. The first, a very fine struggle, was won by Australia by
-7 runs, the second by the same side by eight wickets, and the third by
-the Englishmen by an innings and 98 runs. The professionals were a very
-strong side at all points of the game, and Barnes greatly distinguished
-himself by heading both batting and bowling averages, sharing the
-batting honours with Shrewsbury and Bates, while the bowling was very
-equally distributed among six well-known names, Barnes, Bates, Flowers,
-Attewell, Ulyett, and Peel.
-
-The 1886 Australian eleven in England furnished some names new to
-English grounds, and for the first time Evans was able to find the
-time for the journey. As it turned out, however, his great reputation
-would have been better cared for if he had not been brought over for
-the first time when his powers were decidedly on the wane, and both
-in batting and bowling he was practically a failure. Jarvis appears
-as a wicket-keeper, and a very able colleague to Blackham he has
-always proved himself, besides being at times useful with the bat.
-J. Trumble, W. Bruce, and M’Ilwraith are the other new names, and
-of these, Bruce alone has made much mark in first-class cricket,—a
-beautiful fieldsman and thrower, and a pretty, hard-hitting,
-left-handed batsman, but one who has never quite succeeded in doing
-himself full justice on English grounds.
-
-The same signs of deterioration that were observable in the 1884
-eleven, as compared with that of 1882, were now more strongly
-pronounced. The new men were quite unable to adequately replace
-Murdoch, Macdonnell, Bannerman, Massie, Horan, and Boyle, while, to
-add to their misfortunes, Spofforth met with a severe accident which
-crippled him for some time, and never allowed him to again reach his
-proper form during the tour. On the other hand, their English opponents
-could command a very strong side, and in place of the dearth of fine
-new players which the Australians were experiencing, found ready to
-hand several younger players of great promise. The days of Lohmann,
-Briggs, and Stoddart were commencing, names that were destined to
-furnish a difficult nut for Australians to crack for many a day.
-The older men too on the English side were all at the best period
-of their play, and Grace, Shrewsbury, Read, and Steel could hardly
-fail to put up a big score among them on any given occasion. The only
-cheerful feature of a dismal record, in which the nine victories could
-only claim a narrow lead of one over the eight defeats, was the fine
-all-round form of Giffen. This great player, now at the top of his
-game, headed both batting and bowling averages, and was to be from this
-time a tower of strength to Australian cricket. Spofforth’s unfortunate
-accident came at a time when there seemed every likelihood of his being
-quite as successful as ever, but from that time to the end of the tour
-his bowling powers seemed to have temporarily deserted him, and that
-alone was a disaster to the side of the very first magnitude. Garrett
-and Palmer still continued to do yeoman service in bowling, although
-rather more expensive than formerly, and both S. Jones and Scott gave
-some fine batting displays.
-
-Of the three matches against England, the first was won by England by
-the small margin of four wickets, and each of the other two in one
-innings. Fortune had indeed deserted our Australian friends for the
-moment, and, worst of all, the absence of promising young players gave
-no hope for the immediate future. Yet, if we consider for a moment how
-comparatively small had been the amount of first-class cricket hitherto
-played in Australia, we may well rather wonder at the remarkable
-brilliancy of the players sent to us up to this time, than that they
-should now find some difficulty in replacing them.
-
-Without making invidious distinctions, it may be safely asserted that
-in these last two Australian elevens of 1884 and 1886, the loss of
-Murdoch’s captaincy was severely felt, as he always seemed to have the
-happy knack of keeping his team well in hand and up to the highest
-standard of their play.
-
-Once more in 1886 did a strong team of professionals go to Australia
-under the indefatigable Shaw and Shrewsbury. Although beaten twice
-by New South Wales, they won four matches out of five against
-representative Australian elevens, the other being drawn, no mean
-achievement. The days of Turner and Ferris were beginning, and the
-former was now rapidly becoming one of the great bowlers of the day.
-A beautifully easy delivery and great power of pace, combined with a
-quickness of break back that baffled the strongest defence, were the
-characteristics of this fine cricketer’s style. Ferris, although not so
-attractive in his methods, made an excellent colleague in their bowling
-partnership, with his steady left-handed deliveries.
-
-Lyons for the first time appears among the representative Australian
-players. Very big and powerful, he proved a worthy successor to the
-great hitters of the earlier Australian elevens, and some of his
-hitting, performed with little apparent effort and without moving
-the feet, was a wonderful exhibition of sheer muscular force of arm.
-Giffen’s loss from illness was a great blow to the Australians, and
-some of the older bowlers were now losing something of their skill. On
-the other side, the English bowling was very strong, with Lohmann and
-Briggs to lead it, and Shrewsbury at the top of his form in batting.
-
-So popular had these Australian tours now become that in the winter of
-1887-88 two separate English elevens visited Australia, one under G. F.
-Vernon, and the other under Shrewsbury. This division of forces, which
-was for many reasons to be regretted, did not appear to materially
-affect their chances of success, as the teams lost only two or three
-matches between them. H. Trott and H. Trumble were prominently seen
-for the first time this season, and were both destined to take a very
-leading part in the games of the next few years. Trumble as a bowler is
-probably now second to none, making admirable use of his great height,
-and exercising the best of judgment in his admixture of different paces
-and flights. Trott, an excellent batsman and useful change bowler, was
-always a useful man on the side, but it has been his fine judgment as
-captain that has proved him to be so invaluable a member of it.
-
-The representatives of Australia were met three times by Shrewsbury’s
-eleven, and twice by Vernon’s, and all these five matches ended in
-English success—crushing evidence of the now seriously deteriorated
-form of the Australians. Shrewsbury and W. W. Read gave many fine
-exhibitions of batting, and came out more than 25 points ahead of
-their nearest competitors in the batting list. Lohmann and Briggs for
-Shrewsbury’s side, and Attewell and Peel for Vernon’s, did most of the
-bowling with conspicuous success.
-
-The 1890 Australian eleven for England furnished a surprise in the
-return of Murdoch to the headship of affairs, and, in spite of some
-obvious disadvantages of increasing age and weight, his form was once
-more able to place him at the head of the batting averages. First
-of a rather moderate lot must be the estimate of this performance,
-and only Barrett besides himself was able to claim an average of over
-20, his and Barrett’s being 23 and 22 respectively. Barrett, here for
-the first time, was a left-handed bat with dogged powers of defence,
-highly uninteresting to watch. Burn, the Tasmanian, a batsman of some
-reputation, did not show to much advantage over here, and Walters, a
-powerful Victorian, who had proved a great run-getter in Australia
-for some years, seemed quite unable to accommodate himself to altered
-conditions. S. E. Gregory appears for the first time, and at once made
-a name for himself by his wonderful fielding and throwing in from
-cover-point or mid-off. The powers of batting which were to make him
-so useful a member of most of the Australian elevens of the next few
-years were not yet much in evidence. The most of the bowling was as
-before entirely thrown on the shoulders of the undaunted pair, Turner
-and Ferris, and most admirably did they acquit themselves. 215 wickets
-for an average of 12 and 215 wickets for an average of 13 are figures
-that speak eloquently of a hard season’s work well performed. Charlton
-and Trumble were their assistants nearest in point of performance,
-but Trumble, although at that time a steady persevering bowler, had
-not yet acquired sufficient mastery of break and pace to be really
-dangerous. For the first time the losses of the team, sixteen, exceed
-the victories, thirteen, a terrible falling-off from the successes of
-ten years ago. Three matches were arranged against the full strength
-of England, but only the first two were played, both won by England,
-by seven wickets and two wickets respectively, the third match being
-abandoned through rain. It was said, not untruthfully, that these two
-narrow defeats against strong English sides, especially the latter of
-the two, conferred more credit on the Australians than any other of
-their performances, but an eleven can hardly be congratulated that has
-such a criticism as its chief recommendation.
-
-In the winter of 1891-92 quite a new plan was carried out, Lord
-Sheffield collecting and taking out a strong English eleven, including
-once more the veteran “W. G.,” Stoddart, and other fine players. The
-eleven, to be really representative of England’s strength, would have
-required some additions to the batting, but Grace, Stoddart, M. Read,
-and Abel made at all events a strong backbone to the defence, and
-the bowling was well up to the highest mark in the hands of Briggs,
-Lohmann, Attewell, and Peel. Three matches were played against combined
-Australia, the first two being lost by 55 and 72 runs, and the third
-won easily in one innings. Of this last match, however, it should be
-said that the two sides batted under quite unequal conditions, the
-English on a hard dry wicket, and the Australians on one spoilt by
-rain. Lyons, Bannerman, and Bruce all did excellent service in batting,
-and Lyons’ second innings of 134 in the Sydney match was a very fine
-display of hitting. Australian bowling had suffered considerably from
-the absence in England of Ferris, and Turner, although still about
-the best Australian bowler, was hardly so deadly as formerly. Grace
-was able to show his Australian admirers that the eighteen years that
-had elapsed since his last visit had little diminished his marvellous
-skill, and his average of 44 in eleven-a-side matches brought him
-easily to the top, Abel, Stoddart, and M. Read all coming out with good
-figures.
-
-The improved form of the Australians this season added much to the
-interest which was felt in the 1893 Australian eleven, who came,
-moreover, as a thoroughly representative side, no other Australian
-cricketer, except possibly Moses, having any real claim for selection.
-An advance on the form of the last few years they certainly exhibited,
-but, although the quality of the cricket opposed to them was certainly
-of great merit, the summed-up results of the tour, eighteen matches
-won to ten lost, cannot be said to show conclusively that all the lost
-ground had yet been made up.
-
-The season of 1893 was exceptionally sunny and fine, so that many
-more hard wickets were played on than in an average English summer.
-The strain on the bowlers of a travelling eleven was accordingly
-severe, and Turner was not able to preserve the unassailed position
-of superiority hitherto held by him. On the hard wickets G. Giffen
-was perhaps the best bowler of the side, and he is said to have not
-unreasonably complained of the invariable regularity with which his
-bowling was made use of on the hard wickets, while, on the more
-difficult wickets, the other bowlers were able to dispose of their
-more easily conquered victims.
-
-A great improvement is to observed in Trumble both in batting and
-bowling, and he had now reached a formidable degree of power in both
-departments of the game. Graham made a most promising _début_ as a bat
-and fine out-field; indeed, his batting was quite one of the features
-of the tour. Another pair of batsmen of most unequal appearance and
-batting methods were also very successful, Lyons and A. Bannerman, who
-generally went in first together. Some of Lyons’ hitting ranks high
-among the recorded feats of big hitting, and Bannerman’s dogged defence
-was never more usefully employed during his long career. G. H. Trott,
-too, and G. Giffen were both generally useful with the bat, and the
-eleven throughout showed a higher level of batting power than had been
-seen for some years.
-
-If we compare this eleven with the strong years of 1882 and 1884, we
-should say that the 1893 team would naturally suffer in the absence
-of Murdoch at his best, and in the bowling falling somewhat below the
-standard of that of the four great bowlers of that day, Turner not
-being at his best and Trumble not quite attained to his full powers.
-
-The English representatives of this year were of great strength. Grace,
-Shrewsbury, Stoddart, Gunn, Jackson, A. Ward, W. W. Read, all in fine
-form, made an immensely strong batting combination, while an era of
-great fast bowlers was arising, with Richardson, Mold, and Lockwood
-all now coming to the full possession of their great powers, and
-the slow bowling in the safe and capable hands of Briggs and Peel.
-It is doubtful if in the whole history of English cricket three such
-exceptionally fine fast bowlers as these ever flourished at the same
-time, and the bowling of one or other of them influenced the play of
-most of the great matches for some years at this time.
-
-Only one of the three matches against England was played to a finish,
-and that resulted in a one-innings victory for England. The other two
-both ended in draws none too favourable to the chances of an Australian
-victory.
-
-Many fine innings were played by the chief English players during these
-matches, while Graham with 107 at Lord’s and Trott with 92 at the Oval
-did great things for the Australians.
-
-A great drawback to Australian success in a summer so favourable to
-hard wickets was the absence of a reliable fast bowler. The days of E.
-Jones were now soon to begin, and had he been available at this time, a
-great addition to the all-round strength would have been realised. The
-unusual wealth of bowlers of this description in the English elevens at
-this time made this weakness especially noticeable.
-
-[Illustration: _AN ELEVEN OF MISS WICKETS._]
-
-And now, having traced in somewhat cursory fashion the ups and downs of
-Australian _v._ English cricket through some thirty-two years of its
-earlier existence, we leave the history of its further development at
-a time when the present generation of Australian players are beginning
-to make their appearance. The process of development between the days
-of 1861 and the date of the first Australian eleven, 1878, seems to
-have been gradual and steady. With the arrival of that notable eleven
-were apparent great possibilities in the future, and, quicker even than
-could have been thought possible, came the rapid progress, until the
-culminating point of 1882 and 1884 was reached. From that time came the
-curiously steady and disappointing decline, till, as we have lately
-seen, the 1893 team once more gave promise that the ten lean years
-were over, and a new era of prosperity about to begin. Right up to the
-present day Australians were now to show themselves fully equal to
-meeting our very best on even terms both here and in the Colonies.
-
-How profoundly this interchange of cricketing visits has influenced
-the course of cricket in England can hardly be too much insisted upon.
-Without them a representative English eleven would have never been
-seen in the field at all, and how great a loss this fact alone would
-have been to the cricketing world, both of players and spectators, can
-hardly be overstated.
-
-That our Australian cousins should so soon have been able to tackle us
-on even terms, in spite of their vastly smaller population and their
-comparatively small number of first-class matches, must always be a
-somewhat humbling problem for our cricketing philosophers. Certainly
-they have the advantage of a longer cricketing season, and a greater
-likelihood of finding the weather sufficiently fine to ensure their
-cricket being played on good wickets. In this last factor we may
-probably find the key to the whole matter, and, favourable conditions
-being their normal experience, we may always look with confidence to
-them for a very high level of play, and one that will tax to the utmost
-the capacity of our best players.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER IX
-
-ENGLISH AND AUSTRALIAN CRICKET FROM 1894 TO 1902
-
-By A. C. MACLAREN
-
-
-In the autumn of 1894 Mr. A. E. Stoddart, acting upon the invitation
-from the New South Wales and Victorian Cricket Association, sailed
-for Australia, with a side composed of the following players: A. E.
-Stoddart, F. G. J. Ford, H. Philipson, L. H. Gay, A. C. Maclaren, T.
-Richardson, W. Brockwell, W. Lockwood, A. Ward, J. Briggs, R. Peel,
-J. T. Brown, and W. Humphreys. In the selection of his team Mr.
-Stoddart gave general satisfaction, although some well-known names
-were missing, which was not surprising, since it is impossible for
-all who are invited to see their way to leave home for seven months
-of the year. If there was a weak spot in the team, it was generally
-admitted to lie in the batting; yet, as events proved, the bowling was
-the more unreliable of the two. It should not be forgotten, however,
-that bowlers cannot possibly be expected to come out with the same
-figures as on our English wickets; and in the same way, it is only
-reasonable to expect our batsmen to do even better than on our home
-wickets, which certainly do not come up to those of Australia, where
-the climate can be depended upon. L. H. Gay, whose performances at
-Cambridge were of such excellence that the English skipper invited him
-without ever having had the opportunity of seeing him perform behind
-the wickets, kept so much below his form, at the outset of the tour,
-that the second string, H. Philipson, took his place, and with such
-excellent results that the old Cantab never secured a place in the team
-at all. The wicket-keeping of H. Philipson had not a little to do with
-our winning the rubber. The tour opened none too auspiciously, since
-we went down before South Australia, our first big engagement; but
-too much importance ought never to be attached to the opening game,
-owing to those who have not previously visited Australia being wholly
-unaccustomed to the great glare of Adelaide, and to the fast pace of
-the wicket. Again, it should not be forgotten that the captain, without
-wishing to jeopardise his chance of a win, distributes his bowling as
-equally as he can, since there are but two matches before the first
-test match takes place, and the men who are not bowling their length
-in these early games are given longer turns with the ball than they
-would have in a test match. Thus, when a man is found to be in form,
-not much use is made of him, unless the game appears to take a turn
-against his side; and the necessary amount of trundling meted out to
-those out of form may have been the means of keeping off the star
-bowler too long. The Australians, when touring in England, work on
-very similar lines, to enable them to get the side as well balanced
-as possible for the test matches, which is sufficient to prevent them
-from quite winning one or two of the early games. In our first innings
-at Adelaide, no fault could be found with our batting, since Lockwood,
-Ford, Ward, Stoddart, Briggs, and Gay all scored from 38 to 66, whilst
-Brown scored 113 out of a total of 477. Our opponents replied with 338,
-Darling, whose first big match it was, contributing a fine innings
-of 117, whilst Clem Hill also made his bow to the public, being sent
-in to bat No. 10, and scoring 20 runs. Richardson, who never got his
-length, since he kept over-pitching the ball, was bowled a great deal,
-which was only natural, his one wicket costing 83 runs, whilst Peel,
-as a contrast, took five wickets for 69; Lockwood had 70 knocked off
-him without taking a wicket, and Briggs 74 for two wickets, whilst
-Humphreys took two for 62. But in regard to the last-named, it was
-apparent to all that he would do little or no good in the first-class
-matches, since the Australians treated him with the greatest respect,
-refusing absolutely to be drawn; thus the out-fields had little or
-nothing to do, and singles and twos, chiefly by placing, were the
-result. It caused us no surprise when our captain decided to leave him
-out in the eleven-a-side matches. That Humphreys was past his prime,
-I for one will not admit, for his bowling was as good as anything he
-showed us at home; but, with only three days to finish a game, it is
-not surprising that our players, for the most part, played a free game
-when pitted against him, whilst the Australians preferred to take no
-liberties when such were unnecessary, owing to the games being played
-to a finish in their own country. To these altered conditions of the
-game do I attribute the failure of the lob bowler, for he used his head
-well, and his fieldsmen, upon whom a lob bowler must depend, were all
-that he could have wished. During our tour it was very evident that
-our opponents intended to do little or no hitting, with one or two
-exceptions, and I am of opinion that their policy is the best; indeed,
-with the exception of hitting in the air for the purpose of keeping a
-man in the out-field, I would have none of it, and would never wish to
-see any member of my side attempt the same, excepting always the hitter
-of the Jessop or Ford type. It had very nearly escaped my memory that
-Humphreys carried all before him in the up-country or picnic matches,
-the locals for the most part attempting to hit him out of the ground,
-with disastrous results so far as they were concerned. To return to the
-Adelaide match, our batting failed hopelessly in the second innings,
-although the wicket played well right up to the finish, our opponents
-being left with 226 to win, and obtaining the same for the loss of four
-men, Reedman, of somewhat awkward style, scoring 83 of the number.
-Journeying on to Melbourne, we were more successful, for, always having
-a bit the best of matters, we eventually won by 145. The batting was
-rather uneven, for Stoddart, Peel, and myself scored no fewer than 350
-out of 416. A. E. Trott bowled far and away the best of our opponents,
-taking six for 103; whereas C. M’Leod, of whom much was expected, could
-claim but two victims for 89 runs. Beyond his length, there was little
-in his deliveries, although later in the tour he bowled a ball which
-went away with his arm, and which required very careful watching. Our
-opponents replied with a total of 306, Harry Trott coming out best
-with a score of 70; but there was nothing which struck us very much in
-regard to the batting of our opponents in this innings. Peel did what
-little he had to do with the ball very well, taking three for 27, and
-Briggs, who had a long turn, came out with the satisfactory analysis of
-five for 97. Richardson, however, was far from himself yet, so far as
-his bowling was concerned, but I can well remember dropping two easy
-catches off his bowling at cover-point, and I was not the only culprit.
-The fast bowler’s later successes only gave us a further proof, if any
-was needed, of what determination and stamina he was possessed. In our
-second innings, Stoddart, 78, again was seen at his best, with Briggs
-43, and Peel 165. C. M’Leod came out with the best bowling figures,
-taking four for 71. When the Victorians went in to bat, Peel, five for
-73, and Briggs, three for 95, were too much for them. H. Trott, 63, and
-R. M’Leod, 62, did best. Our first match with New South Wales resulted
-in a very easy win for us, after Iredale, in the first innings,
-proved himself well worthy of a place in the forthcoming test match,
-by scoring 133 in his best style. The batting of our opponents was
-very laborious, the total of 293 taking a long time to compile, Peel
-bowling no fewer than forty-seven overs for 75 runs and three wickets.
-Humphreys had one more trial, but without success. Our total of 394
-was made up of three big innings from Brown, 117, Stoddart, 79, and
-Brockwell, 81 run out, the latter playing a beautiful innings. In this
-match Howell astonished all by taking five wickets for 44, a very fine
-performance, on that excellent wicket at Sydney. C. T. B. Turner, on
-the other hand, was far from successful, taking but one wicket for 100
-runs, and on the face of this performance it would have been better to
-have played the younger man in the following week, as events proved.
-On going in a second time, Gregory was the only one who was able to do
-himself justice, Peel accounting for the dismissal of our opponents,
-his five wickets costing 64, whilst Briggs took three for 19. Left with
-81 to make, Ford soon knocked up 39, and we eventually won with eight
-wickets to spare.
-
-Prior to the first test, we played one more game, and that against a
-very poor team representing Queensland, the chief features of the match
-being the return to form of T. Richardson, who had the satisfaction
-of taking eight wickets for 52 in the first innings and three for
-11 in the second, whilst in the batting, Stoddart, 149, Ward, 107,
-each topped the century. The time had now arrived for the first test
-at Sydney, with both sides in fairly good form. Stoddart lost the
-toss to Trott, but so well did Richardson bowl that three wickets
-had fallen for 21 before the game had been in progress half an hour,
-Trott, Lyons, and Darling all being clean bowled by the fast bowler. On
-Iredale and Giffen becoming associated, the game underwent a remarkable
-change, no fewer than 171 being added for the fourth wicket; but had
-our wicket-keeper, who was standing back to the fast bowling, been in
-anything approaching form, no such stand for the fourth or for the
-ninth wicket could possibly have been made. Owing to more than one
-life, Giffen was batting for some four and a quarter hours, his cricket
-being marked by stolid defence. Iredale played a far more attractive
-game, his cutting and driving on the off side being excellent. After
-Giffen’s departure, wickets fell with fair regularity until Blackham
-joined Gregory, whose cricket throughout was of very high order,
-his cutting, glancing to leg, and hooking of any short ball being a
-treat to witness. For an innings of 201, the chances were few and far
-between, and it will always stand out as one of the best innings ever
-played in a test match. Blackham too played a great game for his 74,
-which went a long way towards the making up of so big a total as 586.
-Of our bowlers, Richardson did really well in taking five wickets for
-181, considering how many catches were dropped off his bowling. Peel,
-without bowling badly, certainly was disappointing, his two wickets
-costing 140 runs. Against the huge total of our opponents, we replied
-with 325, Ward 75, Briggs 57, Brockwell 49, and Gay 33, being our chief
-scorers, whilst Giffen certainly bowled best of our opponents, keeping
-a perfect length throughout and using his head well. His four wickets
-cost 75 runs only, and bowling, as he did, forty-three overs after
-scoring 161, the performance was all the more remarkable. Following on,
-as so often happens, we did better at the second attempt, Ward again
-playing a splendid innings of 117, and being well backed up by Brown,
-Briggs, Ford, and Stoddart. Our total of 437 was a good performance
-under the circumstances. Giffen, acting captain in the absence of
-Blackham, who had unfortunately damaged his thumb at the close of our
-innings of 325, had a very long bowl, his analysis reading, 75 overs,
-25 maidens, 164 runs, 4 wickets; yet it could not be urged that he
-bowled himself too much, since he always looked more like wickets
-than any other bowler. If any one might have been used a little more,
-that man was H. Trott, whose style was so different from that of the
-other bowlers. With 177 left to get to win, it was expected that our
-opponents would knock off the runs on the evening of the fifth day,
-but so slowly did they play that 64 were still required when stumps
-were pulled up for the day. Considering that heavy clouds were seen on
-the horizon and that Richardson had to leave the field after bowling
-a few overs, owing to having contracted a chill, it was all the more
-surprising that Giffen and Trott should have played in such pottering
-fashion on the fifth evening; and, without any exaggeration, no forcing
-tactics were necessary to enable the Australians to get the runs that
-evening. At the close of play on the fifth day, 113 runs had been
-scored for the loss of but two wickets; then, owing to very heavy
-rains in the night, the wicket was wellnigh unplayable on the last
-morning, with the result that Peel and Briggs were too much for our
-opponents, the last eight men being sent back for 53, leaving us with
-a margin of 10 runs. Peel and Briggs were seen at their very best at
-the close, when the fates favoured us; but small as the total was, it
-would have been still less had not I, and later Brown, each missed a
-catch. Against these mistakes, however, there was an exceptionally fine
-catch by Brockwell, which sent back Darling, and which had as much as
-anything to do with our victory.
-
-The second test match at Melbourne resulted in another victory for us
-by a majority of 94 runs, after our opponents had won the toss and
-decided to put us in to bat. With such bowlers as Turner and Trumble
-against us, on a difficult wicket, it was not surprising that our total
-was a poor one, the whole side being sent back for 75. Turner took five
-wickets for 32, whilst Trumble secured three for 17, after Coningham
-had commenced the attack and had quickly got rid of two of the first
-batsmen. As often happens, the wicket dried at a great pace, with the
-result that we were bound to get wickets quickly on the afternoon of
-the first day’s play, if we were to hold any chance of winning, since
-it was patent to all that the wicket would be perfect on the following
-morning. Tom Richardson, thoroughly grasping the situation, fairly
-revelled in the importance of the occasion, taking five wickets for
-57, and those good wickets were captured on a much-improved pitch.
-This fine performance on the part of the fast bowler enabled us, in
-the place of our opponents, to bat on a good wicket next day, with the
-result that our captain fairly excelled himself by scoring the huge
-total of 173, exercising much self-restraint throughout his long stay
-at the crease; and thanks to this fine display, and to the general
-consistency of the batting, we totalled 475. When our opponents went
-to the wickets for the last time, so well did Trott and Giffen play
-that 190 was on the board for the loss of but one batsman. At this
-stage of the game a wise move on the part of Stoddart, in handing the
-ball to Brockwell, brought about an extraordinary change, Giffen being
-easily taken at point in attempting to play a ball to leg which went
-away with the bowler’s arm, and immediately afterwards Trott, who had
-played capital cricket for 95, being very well caught and bowled low
-down by the same bowler, Brockwell. With the exception of Bruce, who
-hit freely for 54, no other batsman withstood the attack of Peel and
-Brockwell, a victory for us resulting. In regard to this match, I have
-always thought that for downright good cricket it was not to be beaten.
-The wonderful bowling of Richardson in the first innings, together with
-that short, sharp piece of work on the part of Brockwell, will ever be
-dear to our memory, when the fine batting of Trott and Giffen seemed
-almost certain to reap the reward of a win for the Colonials; nor will
-it be possible to forget the great effort on the part of our captain,
-whose long innings never lacked sparkle, even if the importance of the
-occasion demanded all his patience.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing by_ _N. Wanostrocht._
-_THE HON. SPENCER PONSONBY._
-(_Right Hon. Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane, G.C.B._)]
-
-The third test match, at Adelaide, was disappointing from a spectator’s
-point of view, since on a perfect wicket our opponents were dismissed
-for 238, of which number no fewer than 79 were made by the last two
-men, A. Trott and Galloway, whilst our effort resulted in the paltry
-total of 124, the wicket for both teams being in a good run-getting
-condition. On going to the wickets a second time, our opponents played
-in something approaching their proper form, scoring 411, Iredale
-claiming 140, a very fine innings, whilst A. Trott again carried his
-bat for 72. Our second venture proved no better than the first, the
-whole side being sent back for 143, A. Trott meeting with extraordinary
-success in taking eight wickets for 43; and seldom, if ever, has any
-one met with such success as did the younger Trott with bat and ball
-in this test match. Our failure was due, to a very great extent, to
-the excessive heat, which deprived us of all chance of a good night’s
-rest throughout the match, but at the time the match was played I
-have no hesitation in giving it as my opinion that our opponents were
-considerably the better team, and thoroughly deserved their victory.
-
-Curiously enough, the fourth test match, at Sydney, like the first
-game, was spoilt by rain, and on this occasion the Australians
-extricated themselves from a very awkward position as only good men
-can. On winning the toss, Stoddart decided to put his opponents in
-first, a move which we, to a man, considered the right one, and up
-to a certain point all went very well, six of our opponents having
-been sent back for 51. Then, however, an extraordinary exhibition of
-forcing tactics at the outset, to be followed by more careful play, on
-the part of Graham, entirely altered the aspect of affairs, no fewer
-than 284 being on the board at the close of the innings, A. Trott
-once again playing admirable cricket for 86 not out. When the game
-was resumed on Monday, there had been so much rain overnight that the
-wicket was quite unplayable, and instead of having the firm wicket we
-had expected to bat upon, we found the pitch to be impossible, with
-the result that we were dismissed twice for the small totals of 65 and
-72, Turner and Giffen doing what they liked with the ball. Had Graham
-been dismissed cheaply, we would undoubtedly have batted for the last
-two hours of the first day, the only occasion of the wicket being in
-favour of run-getting throughout the match. In that case we should very
-likely have won, since our opponents would have had a bad wicket for
-their second strike. In my opinion, Graham’s performance in scoring 105
-was one of the finest things that have ever happened in test matches,
-coming in as he did when the wicket was at its worst, and going right
-out to the bowling from the commencement of his innings, hitting to
-all parts of the ground, until the wicket gradually improved, when he
-settled down to a sounder game; nor should A. Trott’s fine score be
-overlooked, although the wicket then had improved.
-
-The final test game, at Melbourne, which was to decide the rubber, was
-one of the very best fights in which I have taken part. On winning the
-toss the Australians certainly gained an advantage, for the wicket was
-in perfect condition for long scores, and thanks to consistent scoring
-throughout the team, the good total of 434 was run up against us, to
-which number Darling 74, Gregory 70, and Giffen 57, were the chief
-contributors. Considering that H. Trott also made 42, and that several
-others got going, it was perhaps astonishing that more runs were not
-obtained, but Peel, Richardson, and Briggs all kept pegging away in
-their best style, and few runs were given away. Our start was not too
-good, four wickets being down for some 120 runs; Stoddart alone, in
-scoring 68, playing up to form. On Peel joining me, 162 were added
-for the fifth wicket, a stand which caused it to be anybody’s game.
-Unfortunately, the tail end did little, and we finished the innings 29
-runs to the bad. Of the Australian bowling, H. Trott did far better
-than any other bowler, his four wickets costing 71 runs only, and I
-have always thought that had he bowled more in the tests there would
-have been a different tale to tell about these games. Turner might
-have been very useful, and his exclusion caused a lot of criticism
-at the time, and rightly so, too, we having the greatest respect for
-him as a bowler. Still, it is very easy to be wise after the event.
-In our opponents’ second innings, wickets were always falling with
-fair regularity, thanks to Richardson putting in some sterling work,
-whilst Peel kept them playing. Darling, Giffen, and H. Trott, all of
-whom had done very well in the first innings, again played well, but
-the rest were very disappointing from a Colonial point of view, and
-the fact that a dust-storm made itself felt was scarcely a good enough
-excuse to account for the want of success on the part of so many.
-Richardson’s performance in taking six wickets for 104 was one of which
-he might well feel proud, but to thoroughly appreciate such work one
-should be on the spot, for there is a certain indescribable charm in
-watching such a man. C. T. B. Turner and J. T. Hearne, in the same
-manner, have always had their admirers. With 297 left for us to get
-to win, our task was no light one for a fourth innings, and it became
-no easier when Brockwell was sent back after scoring 5. Next morning
-H. Trott succeeded in getting the skipper out l.b.w. from the first
-ball bowled, and our position became desperate. As all the cricketing
-world knows, Brown and Ward now made their never-to-be-forgotten stand,
-the first-named from the commencement of his innings going for the
-bowling in a manner which had seldom, if ever, been seen before on the
-Melbourne ground. Driving along the ground and over the in-fields’
-heads, together with the short-arm hook of any ball at all on the short
-side, were his chief methods of scoring, and he treated all bowlers
-alike. Ward in the meantime was playing his usual patient game,
-without failing to score whenever opportunity presented itself, and
-his effort was second only to Brown’s. Not until he had scored 140 was
-Brown sent back, and, disappointed as the spectators must have been,
-yet they could not resist giving him a splendid reception on his return
-to the pavilion. Ward, too, was equally well received when he had the
-misfortune to be sent back only 7 short of the century. With 30 odd
-runs only left to get to win, Peel and myself were together when the
-number had been scored. This was certainly one of the grandest matches
-ever witnessed, and for downright good cricket from both teams I place
-it in front of all the test matches in which I have taken part. If we
-had any luck in the game, it was in the Scotch mist on the last day
-of the match, which helped to put the dust together on the pitch, and
-enabled the wicket to play as well as it did on the first morning of
-the game. It was remarked by not a few at the time that seldom did
-the best batsmen all come so well out of the bag together on such an
-important occasion, and it certainly was exceptional that the five men
-in form should have scored as follows—the two innings being added
-together: Ward 125, Brown 170, Stoddart 79, Peel 88 for once out, and
-myself 140 once out.
-
-I have gone rather fully into details in regard to the 1894-95 tour
-in Australia, for the purpose of laying the foundation of my work.
-In 1896 it was the turn of our opponents to visit our shores, and H.
-Trott brought over a far better combination than many expected after
-reading the criticisms of some of the experts in Australia. It has
-always remained a mystery to me and many others why A. E. Trott was
-left behind, after all his good work against us in the Colonies, for
-he was in those days unquestionably a greater player than in any one
-of his English seasons’ cricket. The team did a great deal better than
-expected, for not a single county defeated them, although two out of
-the three test matches went against them. In H. Trott they had as fine
-a leader as ever captained an Australian, or, for that matter, any
-other team; never missing an opportunity throughout the many phases
-of the game, he had his men well in hand from the commencement of the
-tour, and his quiet manner, together with a never-ruffled temper, won
-him the esteem and respect of opponents and comrades alike; indeed,
-it is no exaggeration to say that no team from Australia ever pulled
-quite so well together as did that of H. Trott. Possibly Trott’s
-excellence as a captain lay in the fact that he always appeared to
-know exactly what bowler to use against each batsman, added to which,
-he never gave batsmen any presents of runs by having a fieldsman in
-a useless position. Although there was nothing very startling about
-the batting, yet it was very well balanced, no fewer than seven of
-the side obtaining over 1000 runs, in a season when the wickets in
-August were most difficult. Gregory, Darling, Hill, Iredale, Trott,
-and Giffen all had their admirers, whilst Kelly kept wicket in his
-best form throughout a long and trying tour; and but for coming
-immediately after such an artist as Blackham, more notice might have
-been taken of his excellent work. The variety of the bowling had not
-a little to do with the success of the team, always remembering how
-well it was handled, whilst we must not lose sight of the fact that
-each fieldsman had every confidence in the bowler, occupying at times
-the most daring positions under the very nose of the batsman, which
-often resulted in the downfall of a wicket, without the said fieldsman
-ever running much risk of an accident. The simple reason was that the
-bowler always knew what his men were working for, and never gave them
-away by an overtossed or by a short-pitched ball. The Australians,
-generally speaking, have always appeared to me to know better than
-we do how a batsman is the most likely to be defeated, and on their
-side there is more of that mutual understanding between bowler and
-fieldsmen that is so valuable. M’Kibbin, Trumble, Jones, and Giffen
-all took over 100 wickets, and if the first-named came out with the
-best analysis, Trumble took far more wickets, and could boast of never
-having a bad day, for if the wicket was suitable for small scoring, he
-never failed to do all that was asked of him, and if I had to name one
-for excellence of length, I should without hesitation name Trumble of
-all bowlers it has been my pleasure to see or play against. Jones’s
-pace secured for him many wickets, and if some expressed a view that
-his action was, to say the least, doubtful, there were others who
-considered his bowling on this tour fair, and I certainly never saw
-anything wrong on the occasions on which I played against him in
-England. Giffen had the distinction of scoring 1000 runs and taking 117
-wickets, a great achievement, considering the many times he has visited
-us. In fielding the team more than held their own, for Gregory at cover
-was always a treat to watch, whilst Iredale at the time had no superior
-in the out-field, and Hill and Darling possessed the safest of safe
-hands, in whatsoever position they were fielding. Added to this list
-of honour must be the name of Jones, who did many brilliant things at
-mid-off. In regard to returning the ball to the wicket from any part of
-the field, the Australians have always, since I have known them, given
-us a long start, the ball being returned more accurately and, what is
-equally important, more swiftly. We naturally have our shining lights
-in this respect, but as a team the Colonials show themselves off far
-better than do we in the field. In regard to the test matches, the
-first of the series, which was played at Lord’s, was rather peculiar,
-since our visitors, playing a long way below their proper form, were
-dismissed for 53 on a wicket which could have had little the matter
-with it, after the total of 292 made against them. Richardson and
-Lohmann were the two bowlers to carry all before them, but the aversion
-the Australians have always had to the ground at headquarters may have
-had not a little to do with the poor display of their batsmen. On our
-batsmen going to the wickets, those two sterling veterans, W. G. Grace
-and Robert Abel, after the dismissal of Stoddart, played so finely
-that the game appeared to be at our mercy; but the tail end did not
-do quite so well as expected, and the total of 292 was the result.
-There was nothing in the bowling of the Australians worth commenting
-upon. It was in the second innings that our visitors showed such good
-form, when the game appeared too far gone to give them any chance of
-a win. All the more credit then to the captain and Gregory for their
-great stand of 221, which caused their side to have a lead of 44 runs
-with six wickets to fall after the dismissal of Gregory; and had the
-end batsmen taken as much getting out as usual, it is quite possible
-that they would have won, since there was a lot of rain on the second
-evening of the match. As it was, many of our supporters were dubious
-as to the result when we were set 111 to get to win, on a wicket
-which had been affected by rain. The runs, however, were hit off for
-the loss of four batsmen, thanks chiefly to Stoddart and Brown; but
-had all the chances been accepted, there is no doubt that the game
-would have been closer. Every one was delighted with the fine batting
-of Trott and Gregory, many being of opinion that it was the finest
-exhibition ever witnessed in a test match; the Englishmen, however,
-were very confident that Trott was caught by Hayward with his score
-at 61. This was the occasion of the crowd encroaching on the field of
-play, which handicapped our opponents not a little. The second test, at
-Manchester, resulted in a meritorious win for the Australians, after
-they had won the toss, and always appeared to hold the trump card in
-a game which was played throughout on a perfect wicket—in fact, a
-wicket after the heart of the Colonials. Thanks to Iredale, who started
-very shakily, but later played a beautiful innings, and Giffen, who
-played his usual game of soundness, a total of 412 was run up against
-us. Iredale played a fine game for his side in compiling 108, most of
-his runs being obtained by crisp cutting and driving on the off side.
-With the exception of Trott, no one else bothered us much, in spite
-of the big total made against us. Richardson put in some of his best
-work in obtaining seven wickets for 168, bowling as he did no fewer
-than sixty-eight overs. Our batting in the first innings was as feeble
-as that of our opponents had been excellent, for with the exception
-of K. S. Ranjitsinhji and Lilley, who scored 62 and 65 respectively,
-no one showed any form at all. The wickets were very equally divided
-amongst our opponents, of whom possibly M’Kibbin, who was left out at
-Lord’s, bowled best. Following on, the batting of the side again failed
-most ignominiously, with one exception, and that was the wonderful
-display of K. S. Ranjitsinhji, who scored no fewer than 154, and at
-the finish was not out. His performance was without doubt the finest
-in the match, playing as he was throughout his long stay at the wicket
-a losing game—and every cricketer knows what that means. His cutting
-and leg-glancing will never be forgotten by those who were lucky enough
-to be there. The miserable failure of all others, excepting Stoddart,
-was inexplicable, since the wicket remained true throughout the game.
-M’Kibbin again came out with the best analysis, and had he played at
-Lord’s, we might not have won so easily as we did. On the Australians
-going in to get 125 to win, so well did Richardson bowl that the
-runs were not hit off until seven wickets had fallen, and when No. 9
-batsman, in the shape of J. Kelly, joined Trumble, 25 runs were still
-required to win. One cannot speak too highly of the coolness exhibited
-by both men, who came through the trying ordeal most creditably.
-Richardson’s bowling performance in this innings will be remembered
-by all who can appreciate fine bowling, for, working his utmost for
-three solid hours, he took six wickets for 76 runs, on a wicket which
-remained good up to the finish, and I have always thought that this was
-one of the best things ever done by a bowler in a test match—all the
-more the pity that the combined effort of K. S. Ranjitsinhji and the
-Surrey express did not meet with its just reward of a win for the Old
-Country. The decider at the Oval naturally aroused a lot of enthusiasm,
-but unfortunately the weather was not propitious, a commencement not
-being possible until five o’clock on the first day. Our winning of
-the toss meant practically the winning of the game, for the pitch was
-in such a state of wet that it was all in favour of the batsmen, and
-when stumps were pulled up for the day 69 runs were on the board for
-the loss of W. G. Grace. Next morning the wicket was unplayable, with
-the result that Trumble carried all before him, taking six wickets
-for 59, the majority of which were made on the previous evening, when
-the wicket was all against bowling and fielding, and I consider our
-opponents were justified in criticising the action of the umpires in
-commencing on the first evening. So badly did our men bowl on the
-treacherous wicket before lunch that 70 went up with Darling and
-Iredale unseparated. Afterwards Jack Hearne went right through the
-side, taking six wickets for 41, keeping an impossible length, and
-making the ball do just enough without too much. Peel really was the
-culprit before lunch, it being the only occasion on which I ever
-remember him failing to do well when all was in favour of the bowler.
-Darling played a fine game for his score of 47, and, thanks to his
-and Iredale’s effort, the Australians finished off their innings but
-26 behind us. In our second innings Trumble again did what he liked,
-taking six wickets for 30, the whole side being out for 84. On the last
-morning of the match, with our opponents left with 111 to get to win,
-the pitch had dried considerably, but Hearne was always able to get
-enough spin on the ball to beat the bat, and the quick break was too
-much for the Australians. As Peel also bowled in his very best form,
-the result was one of the most extraordinary processions to and from
-the wicket by the batsmen, nine wickets being down with 17 only on the
-board. M’Kibbin, the last man, hit up 16, so that the total realised
-44—and yet we are told that wickets are not broad enough! This match
-was the occasion of the professionals holding out for higher payment
-than £10, and then withdrawing from their position. That they had right
-on their side was proved by the increase of pay from that date in the
-test encounters, and it is not generally known that their request for
-higher payment was not sprung upon the Surrey committee at the very
-last moment. Considering the strain of these big matches upon the
-players, it cannot be said that they do not deserve the £20 now given
-to the professionals.
-
-[Illustration: _A CRICKET SONG._]
-
-[Illustration: _A LYRIC OF THE CRICKET FIELD._]
-
-The second team that A. E. Stoddart took to Australia consisted of
-the following: A. E. Stoddart, K. S. Ranjitsinhji, J. R. Mason, N. F.
-Druce, A. C. Maclaren, T. Hayward, T. Richardson, J. Briggs, W. Storer,
-E. Wainwright, G. Hirst, J. H. Board, J. T. Hearne. On the eve of the
-first test, at Sydney, our troubles commenced, the trustees taking it
-upon themselves to postpone the match until Saturday, from Friday,
-the original date of the fixture. This, of course, they had no right
-whatsoever to do; in fact, the Melbourne Club telegraphed to the Sydney
-trustees that the game must take place on the original date fixed.
-Their sole reason for the postponement was to prevent disappointment
-to the up-country people, since there had been a lot of rain. We
-naturally were indignant at the decision, since it was made without
-any one being consulted on our side, and the first we heard of the
-postponement was during dinner on Thursday night, when one of us saw
-an announcement outside a public-house, to the effect that the match
-was put off. By putting the match off until Saturday, the trustees were
-making it absolutely a game of chance, just what they said they were
-trying to avoid, since the captain who won the toss on Saturday would
-undoubtedly have put his opponents in first, and, with fine weather,
-the wicket on Monday would have been perfect for batting, after the
-Sunday intervening. As it happened, the pitch was quite fit to commence
-at twelve o’clock on Friday, the umpires being of that opinion. There
-is no doubt that the alteration was made solely for the purpose of the
-gate, and with no intention of doing us a bad turn. Still, it would
-have been better had those responsible for the blunder admitted their
-mistake at once, instead of trying to make stupid excuses, and giving
-ideas to the press which were scarcely complimentary to us. Owing to a
-merciful providence, it rained all Saturday, and consequently got the
-trustees out of a mess, the match being started on Monday on a perfect
-batsman’s wicket. Unfortunately our captain had the sad misfortune to
-receive a cable from home announcing the death of his mother on the
-Friday morning, which kept him out of all the test games, and naturally
-caused him to be unable to show anything approaching the brilliant form
-of his previous tour. The first test was an extraordinary walk-over
-for us, and yet we never looked like winning another game, so far
-as the tests were concerned, afterwards, unless we except the last
-game at Sydney. After Mason had been sent back cheaply, Hayward and
-myself stayed some considerable time together, and our stand was
-well followed up by Ranjitsinhji, 175, and Hirst, so much so that
-we totalled 551. On getting our opponents in for the last one and a
-half hours on the second day, Richardson and Hearne bowled so well
-that, after the cheap dismissal of their best batsmen, they were never
-able to recover their lost ground, although Trumble and M’Leod made a
-magnificent effort at the finish of the first innings. Following on,
-314 to the bad, the Australians did far better, Darling playing a grand
-innings of 101, whilst Clem Hill put together 86 in his best style.
-The remaining batsmen played very disappointingly, with the exception
-of Kelly, the score reaching 408, leaving us 96 to win, which were hit
-off for the loss of Mason’s wicket. Ranjitsinhji played a wonderful
-innings, considering how ill he had been, only having got out of bed
-on the Sunday morning, when he went for a drive. He was just able to
-last out the hour’s batting he had on the Monday evening, and next
-morning played, especially towards the close of his innings, when his
-strength was leaving him, a regular forcing game. In the second test,
-at Melbourne, owing to the game being played on a new piece of turf,
-which the groundsman was most anxious to avoid, whatever chance we
-might have had was taken from us. The wicket opened out to such an
-extent that one could put one’s fingers into the cracks on the pitch,
-which meant that the ball was always doing something which it had no
-right to do, getting up or keeping low according to the angle at which
-it struck the crack. The Australians were very fortunate, under the
-circumstances, in winning the toss and batting on a perfect wicket on
-the Saturday. They made such good use of their luck that 520 were
-scored, of which number C. M’Leod made 112, whilst Hill, Gregory,
-Iredale, and Trott all showed excellent form, scoring 58, 71, 89, and
-79 respectively. Our bowling was thoroughly collared, and even had
-the wicket remained good, I do not for a moment consider we were good
-enough to win, after the excellent start of our opponents. Our score of
-315 was very creditable. As previously explained, the heat of the sun
-on Saturday and Sunday caused the ground to crack, the wicket previous
-to the test match having been covered up from the sun’s rays for a
-fortnight. Ranjitsinhji, Hirst, Storer, Druce, and Briggs all played
-well for their runs, although the ball kept getting past their defence
-occasionally, as was only natural. On our following on, with the wicket
-getting worse, we were all dismissed for 150, a small score for which
-we were prepared, Noble and Trumble only having to keep a length,
-whilst the wicket did the rest for them.
-
-At Adelaide, the strong light of which city our men dislike as much
-as the Australians take exception to the bad light of Lord’s, we went
-down before our opponents most decisively, they thoroughly outplaying
-us. Joe Darling opened the ball with a clipping innings of 178, his
-driving being very powerful throughout, and, as Hill scored 81 with
-him, the Adelaide people were rightly delighted with the success of
-their two men, the score eventually reaching 573, of which Iredale
-again took 84 in his approved style. Hayward and Hirst alone of our
-men played good cricket, the total being 278 when all were sent back,
-Howell doing most of the damage on an excellent pitch. Following on,
-we did no better, Ranjitsinhji and myself being the only two to bother
-our opponents, who gained a meritorious win by an innings and 13 runs,
-proving beyond all doubt that we beat them at Sydney before the eleven
-had struck form, our first test in the Colonies generally being the
-least difficult to win, for this reason. Noble and M’Leod divided the
-wickets, and in the former our opponents had unearthed a bowler of the
-first order. It was very evident that they were now on the top of their
-form, and our chances of another win in the tests were not too rosy.
-At Melbourne the fourth test resulted in a further easy win for our
-opponents, after they had commenced their innings very inauspiciously,
-losing six wickets for 57, when Hill and Trumble dug their side out of
-a nasty hole, 165 being put on for the seventh wicket. Hill played his
-finest innings of the season; the fact that the total reached only 323,
-of which his contribution was 188, speaks for itself, and it is quite
-possible that the South Australian was at his very best about this
-time. Trumble once again came to the rescue, and I cannot bring to mind
-any player who has so often come off at a pinch. Richardson and Hearne
-divided the wickets practically, and our bowlers did all that could
-have been expected of them. When it came to our turn to bat, every one
-appeared to be out of form, the total reaching 174 only. Whoever was
-put on to bowl, a wicket resulted, the batting being feeble in the
-extreme. Following on, we did very little better, as those who appeared
-to get going were sent back when we were commencing to hope for better
-things, and our opponents had no difficulty in obtaining the required
-number, 115, to win, losing two wickets in the process. In this match
-we were completely outplayed, after we had obtained a flattering start,
-and I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that this combination
-was well in front of any other against which I had played in the past,
-even as it was in front of the team that we met in 1901-2. Sydney
-appeared more to our liking than did other places, if our cricket was
-any criterion, for we certainly did better on this ground, which has
-not quite the same fiery life possessed by other Colonial grounds.
-In the last test our form was better, since, on winning the toss,
-we put together 335, and then dismissed our opponents for 96 less,
-Richardson putting up a capital performance by obtaining eight wickets
-for 94 runs. We completely broke down in our second innings, being
-all disposed of for 178, Trumble and Jones doing the mischief. As our
-opponents had 276 to get to win, the match was by no means lost, so far
-as we were concerned, and as we got M’Leod and Hill out at once, our
-hopes were raised, but Darling soon put the issue beyond doubt, hitting
-out most viciously from the commencement of his innings, although it
-should be mentioned that, with his score at 40, our fast bowler, as
-well as the wicket-keeper, was confident he was out l.b.w. But the
-umpire thought otherwise. On the other hand, Ranjitsinhji was given
-out l.b.w. for an appeal from point, when he was most confident he
-played the ball—a misfortune which, coming as it did immediately after
-my dismissal, had a great bearing on the result of the game. But I in
-no manner wish to insinuate that the umpire made a mistake in either
-case. At the finish our opponents won handsomely by six wickets, a very
-meritorious victory, once more proving, if any proof was required,
-that they could extricate themselves from any position, however
-difficult; and only a really great side is able to do such a thing
-with consistency. Their performances of this tour in Australia were so
-full of merit that I, for one, began to doubt our ability to beat this
-little lot in our own country, and was not slow to communicate my fears
-to better men than myself on my return; so that the result of the next
-Australian tour in England came as no surprise to most of us.
-
-When Darling brought over the same team which defeated us in Australia,
-a good time, so far as their cricket was concerned, was predicted by
-all of us who had knowledge of their excellence in their own country;
-and after the first test match, played at Birmingham, it was admitted
-on all sides that we had not exaggerated their merits. On winning the
-toss in the first game, it took them a whole day to compile 252, which
-slow and over-careful play just cost them the match. Hill, Darling,
-Noble, and Gregory all played well against a not very powerful bowling
-combination, and more runs ought to have been made. Of our lot,
-Ranjitsinhji and Fry alone played good cricket, and our opponents were
-able to claim a lead of 55. On going to the wickets a second time,
-they put together 230 for eight wickets, when they declared; and but
-for Ranjitsinhji, who played a perfect innings in his own inimitable
-style, the Australians would have won, the Sussex amateur carrying his
-bat for 93. At Lord’s there were many changes—too many, I should say;
-for Jessop, Townsend, Lilley, Mead, and myself took the places of W.
-Gunn, Storer, Hirst, J. T. Hearne, and W. G. Grace, the latter having
-telegraphed for me. On winning the toss on a fast wicket, we were all
-out to Jones before we could turn round, with the exception of Jessop
-and Jackson, who made 51 and 73 respectively, the total reaching 206,
-a poor one on that fast wicket. Owing to Hill and Trumper, who fairly
-collared our bowling, our opponents collected the big total of 421
-against us, the two named scoring 135 each, Trumper being left to
-carry his bat. Both played magnificent cricket, and with the exception
-of Noble, 54, no one else did anything. In our second venture we did
-little better, scoring 240, Hayward, Jackson, and myself alone doing
-anything, the wickets being divided up amongst five bowlers, thus
-showing the variety of attack at Darling’s disposal. The 28 required
-to win were hit off without loss, and from this point onwards to the
-end of the tour our opponents preferred to play not to be beaten
-rather than to lay themselves out for a win, and under the existing
-conditions one could scarcely blame them. At Leeds, on a wet wicket,
-the Australians were disposed of for 172, Young bowling extremely
-well, but with provoking bad luck, since he beat the bat times without
-number without hitting the wickets. Worrall hit well for his 76, but
-the boundary was far too short a one, some of his mis-hits going over
-the heads of our out-fields. Briggs was seized with an attack after the
-first day’s play which unfortunately kept him out of the field for more
-than a season, and we were much handicapped in the second innings of
-our opponents, when our first two bowlers required a rest. They were
-unable to get it, however, and Trumble and Laver pulled the match out
-of the fire; and if both were in difficulties at times, they played a
-fine game for their side. Hearne bowled in magnificent form, as also
-did Young. Owing to rain, there was no play on the last day, when we
-required 158 to win, with all our wickets to go down. Hill was unable
-to play any more cricket after this match, being in the hands of the
-doctor. At Manchester—thanks to a wonderfully sound innings on the
-part of Hayward, who scored 130 when things were not looking too rosy
-for us, an effort that was well backed up by Jackson and Lilley—we
-scored 372, and on our opponents going to the wickets, owing to
-Bradley bowling with much fire, they were cheaply dismissed for 196.
-Young, who was suffering from a bad knee, took four of the remaining
-wickets. Following on, with our bowlers literally fagged out, it was
-not surprising to find our opponents masters of the situation, scoring
-346 for seven wickets, when they declared. Worrall, Darling, Trumper,
-and Noble played in their best form, the latter in particular playing
-a great game for his side, but a game which, owing to its slowness,
-was not appreciated by the large crowd, disappointed with the turn the
-match took. With an hour left for play, our batsmen went in to have a
-hit, for the sake of giving the crowd a change, and it was surprising
-to find so many people weighing up our chances on what took place in
-that last hour’s play, which ought to have been ignored. This was
-the third drawn game out of the four matches played, and those of us
-who knew the manner in which that Oval wicket had been pampered with
-patent stuffs, etc., thought it the last ground in the world to finish
-a test match on in three days, with one side laying itself out not
-to be beaten. We compiled the huge total of 576, and as the last six
-men had instructions to be out in less than an hour, one might well
-have wondered what the score would have been had all got as many runs
-as possible. Hayward again played a fine innings of 137, and Jackson
-was at his best for 118, 185 being put up for one wicket, a record by
-15 for a first-wicket stand in a test match, W. G. Grace and Scotton
-having held it up to that time. At the end of the day’s play 435
-appeared on the board for the loss of but four batsmen. Next morning,
-however, each player had to get out to give our bowlers a chance, if
-we were to win the match. Our opponents did well in scoring 352, after
-their somewhat trying experiences of the day previous. Gregory played
-a masterly innings of 117, and with his captain, who made 71, saved
-his side from a defeat, when nothing better than a drawn game awaited
-them. Lockwood, who had been more or less a cripple throughout the
-season, showed us all what we had missed by our inability to play him
-by taking seven wickets for 71 on this perfect pitch, bowling no fewer
-than fifty overs, a performance which caused his leg to give way again,
-and which prevented him from letting himself go in the second innings,
-when our opponents always appeared to have the game saved. But had
-Worrall been caught early on, it is possible we might just have got
-home. In the last half-hour the wicket commenced to go, but it was too
-late for our chance, although Rhodes in that time bowled beautifully,
-taking three wickets in very quick succession. At the drawing of stumps
-our opponents had four wickets still to fall, and were 30 runs on.
-So ended the tour, and out of five test matches no fewer than four
-were left drawn. It is not astonishing to find so many who are to-day
-playing for England wishing for fewer test games, and to have them
-played out; and yet the same order of things continues, gate-money
-alone, so far as can be gathered, standing in the way of a much-needed
-alteration in the test games.
-
-In the autumn of 1901 the Australians honoured me with an invitation to
-collect a team, but owing to the action of the Yorkshire committee in
-not allowing their professionals to accept my invitation, the bowling
-question was made a most difficult one for me to tackle. Thanks to all
-other county committees giving me all assistance possible, a side was
-collected, and had one of our bowlers, in whom I had every confidence,
-only remained sound, it is quite possible that we might have come back
-victorious, for, after winning the first test at Sydney, we had the
-match at Adelaide three parts won when Barnes broke down at a time when
-the wicket had crumbled badly at one end, and when he was the only one
-who could hit the spot. On that occasion the two left-handers, who made
-all the runs, if we except a fine innings of Trumble, were the only two
-who could have put us down, owing to this spot being, of course, on
-the wrong side of the wicket for their batting, looking at it from a
-bowler’s point of view. At Sydney we headed our opponents on the first
-innings in the fourth test, and in the last match, at Melbourne, we
-only went down by 32 runs, after having to bat on a wet wicket. That we
-were unable to stay our games out, especially in the later stages of
-the tour, was scarcely surprising, since we were practically without
-two of our bowlers for more than half of the time, which meant that
-those who were left had far more trundling than was conducive to their
-strength. In the first of the tests, at Sydney, thanks to a good start
-on our part, we ran up a total of 464, Hayward, Lilley, Braund, and
-myself all getting going. On our opponents going to the wickets, so
-well did Barnes bowl, as also Braund and Blythe, that only 168 runs
-were on the board when the last man was sent back. Following on, our
-opponents scored but 4 more than in the first innings, and we were left
-easy winners, Braund and Blythe bowling as well as they ever did in
-their lives. Before the match at Sydney commenced, Blythe unfortunately
-sprained his hand, but it was not until that game was finished that he
-really felt any pain. The leading surgeon in Australia advised rest
-for some considerable time, but the Kent professional thought that the
-hand would not suffer much, especially taking into consideration the
-fact that the wicket was all against long scores, so he took his chance
-in the second test at Melbourne. On winning the toss, I decided to put
-our opponents in, and had Barnes been able to bowl in the mud only half
-as well as he had previously done on the fast wickets, our opponents
-would not have scored 100. As it was, they only put together 112, but
-Blythe found that spinning the ball gave him all the pain which the
-doctor had predicted he would suffer, and Barnes bowled very short
-throughout, notwithstanding the fact that he took six wickets for 42,
-which really was not a great performance on that unplayable wicket.
-When our turn came to bat, our effort resulted in 61, of which Jessop
-claimed 27. Before the day was finished we got rid of five of our
-opponents in their second innings for 48, and had none the worst of the
-match. Next morning, however, with some of the best batsmen still to
-come in, Hill played on the top of his form on what was now a batsman’s
-wicket, scoring 99 before Braund beat him, whilst Duff, who had batted
-out and out the best in the first innings, went one better by scoring
-104 in his first test match, both players being seen quite at their
-top game. Had a chance been accepted, Armstrong, who helped Duff to
-add 120 for the last wicket, would not have received a ball. After our
-early wickets fell, rain made it impossible for the remaining batsmen
-to make a fight of it, although Tyldesley played fine cricket for his
-66. It is only fair to state that, rain or no rain, our opponents
-always appeared to have the game safe after luncheon on the second
-day. Noble in our first innings took seven wickets for 17, making the
-ball do everything but talk, whilst his performance in the second
-innings was very little inferior, when he captured six for 60. Trumble,
-who bowled an excellent length, took the remaining wickets in both
-innings. In the third test, at Adelaide, a lot of runs were obtained,
-considering the wicket was by no means perfect; but the bowlers on
-both sides were not seen at their best, from various causes. Noble was
-suffering from a strain, and Trumble was far from himself, which had
-a good deal to do with our total reaching 388, out of which number
-Braund, who played a beautiful innings, scored 103, whilst Hayward was
-also at his best in compiling 90, and Quaife chipped in with a very
-useful 68. Our opponents replied with 321, Hill coming out best with
-98, being well backed up by Trumper 65 and Gregory 55. Of our bowlers,
-Barnes broke down, after bowling seven overs, at a time when he looked
-very dangerous; but Gunn came along in great style, taking five for
-76, and Braund also did well. After obtaining 200 for five wickets
-in our second innings, a dust-storm, which did us no good, but which
-brought enough rain to eventually do the wicket good, stopped play for
-the day. Continuing, we added another 40, Barnes being unable to bat
-and Trumble bowling in good form. Wanting 315 to win, our opponents,
-thanks to the two left-handers, who made 166 between them, and a
-fine effort on the part of Trumble, claimed a great victory by four
-wickets; but we were very unlucky in losing the services of Barnes,
-who on that wicket could not have helped bowling well. It should not
-be overlooked that the left-handers were batting on a good wicket,
-whereas right-handers had to face a crumbled spot outside the off
-stump. At Sydney we again claimed a lead on the first innings, Hayward,
-Tyldesley, Lilley, and myself all getting runs, whilst Saunders,
-Trumble, and Noble divided the wickets. On the second day Jessop,
-bowling at a great rate, succeeded in getting four good men caught in
-the slips; but Noble and Armstrong mended matters next morning. In our
-second innings, with a lead of 18, we went out one after the other in
-most surprising fashion before the bowling of Saunders, who carried all
-before him on a perfect pitch, our effort resulting in the paltry total
-of 99. Our opponents had no difficulty in making 121 for the loss of
-three wickets. In the last match, at Melbourne, on a difficult pitch,
-we disposed of our opponents for 144, Hayward and Gunn meeting with
-success. We replied with 189, thanks to Jessop, Braund, and Lilley,
-but Trumble was too much for most of us. In their second innings
-our opponents pulled themselves together, and with Hill and Gregory
-in form the total reached 255; and as more rain fell on our going to
-the wickets, our task was a difficult one. In the end we had to put
-up with a defeat by 32 runs, our total of 178 being very creditable
-under the circumstances, since we had much the worst of the wicket,
-on which Noble was seen at his best. Thus ended a tour which was not
-too successful from our point of view; but with the exception of one
-match, all the test games were very close ones, and it was admitted on
-all sides that no team ever fielded in more brilliant style than did
-ours. Jessop did some marvellous bits of work in every match, whilst
-Jones, Braund, Tyldesley, and Quaife all were at their best. Lilley did
-his work well behind the wickets, but was unfortunate in this respect,
-that if he made a mistake, which wicket-keepers are bound to do, it was
-generally a costly one.
-
-The team which Joe Darling brought over in 1902 was, in my opinion, not
-quite so strong as some of us thought, although nothing like so weak
-as some people in Australia tried to make us believe. Possibly they
-had the best of the luck in regard to the weather in the big matches;
-but there was no getting away from the fact that whatever the fates
-gave them they made the very most of, never allowing a chance to slip
-through their fingers in any of the games in which I played against
-them. There was no fortune in losing the services of Trumble for the
-first six weeks or so of the tour, in consequence of an accident at
-the nets, which necessitated a free use of Noble in the bowling
-department in the early matches. At Lord’s, too, during what little
-took place, they were far from themselves, as far as their health was
-concerned; but from that match to the finish of the tour they never
-looked back, and it is quite possible that the reappearance of their
-reliable bowler, Trumble, was a far better tonic than any of the
-medicines they were taking for influenza. In regard to the bowling,
-Darling may not have had too much, but the variety, together with
-the consistent good form of those bowlers at his disposal on the wet
-wickets, was quite sufficient to dispose of the best batsmen playing
-against them in all the matches of the tour. Jones could scarcely be
-expected to do well on the wet wickets, and naturally his figures are
-nothing like so good as on previous occasions. Trumble always made it
-as near a certainty as possible that few runs would be made against
-him, provided the wicket gave him the slightest assistance, thanks to
-his accuracy of length, together with his wonderful knowledge of each
-batsman pitted against him, which he used to the full, and to me he
-appeared to bowl almost better than ever. If Noble was not quite so
-consistent as previously, he can excuse himself on the ground of the
-extra effort required at the commencement of the tour in the absence of
-Trumble; but when he was to be caught at his best, as in the test at
-Sheffield, he carried all before him, and I still think he bowls a more
-difficult ball than any other bowler to-day. That Saunders was included
-was a very good thing for our opponents, since his great break from
-leg on the wet wickets made it very difficult for the batsmen to
-score off him, even if his length was indifferent, as was the case at
-Manchester in the test game, when it was impossible to get him away
-on the leg side of the wicket. In his case it was a triumph for the
-selectors, since, with one exception, his performances in Australia
-scarcely led one to believe that he would do so well as was the case.
-Howell was far from well, added to which he was the recipient of most
-painful news from his home, which was quite sufficient to prevent him
-from showing any of his old brilliance. The fielding of the team was
-of the greatest use to the bowlers, since mistakes were few and far
-between. Hill, Hopkins, and Duff, in the out-field, were very safe,
-whilst their return of the ball to the wicket was, as usual, most
-accurate and far ahead of our style. Of the others, Noble at point was
-very clever, and Gregory was as neat and clean in the picking up and
-return of the ball as ever. Joe Darling handled his team admirably
-throughout, whilst the entire absence of discord, together with the
-many denials of pleasures which one and all underwent, proved how well
-he was fitted for his post. Of the batsmen, Trumper stands right out
-by himself, and I can pay him no higher compliment than saying he has
-only done what I have always thought he was good enough to do. His
-cutting of the ball, which was always placed to beat the fieldsman at
-third man, was admirable, as was his hooking, chiefly by wrist work,
-of the short ball. His driving, too, was not the least conspicuous
-feature of his batting. The pace he always went at at the very start
-of his innings frequently demoralised the bowler, and to his rapid
-commencements, especially at Manchester and Sheffield, in the second
-innings, do I ascribe the poorness of our attack in the majority of
-the test games. Hill played many fine innings, but I thought he was
-a great deal more aggressive, for which his defence had to suffer,
-causing the bowlers less difficulty than used to be the case in
-obtaining his wicket, although I do not wish to insinuate that he is
-not now one of the world’s greatest batsmen. Darling lost a little of
-his old form, although he gave us flashes of his former brilliance,
-as in the test match at Manchester. May be the cares of captaincy
-told on him slightly, at which I do not wonder. Noble was only just
-beginning to enjoy himself with the bat when the tour was at an end,
-although he made 284 against Sussex, the highest score of the season.
-Of the new men, Duff proved himself to be a capital man to accompany
-Trumper to the wickets, being possessed of excellent defence, with a
-slicing sort of cut which brought him in many runs. Hopkins takes all
-the risks of an Englishman, being specially fond of the hook stroke,
-and it is safe to predict that he will continue to improve, although
-he would be the first to admit that, if he is to bowl, it must not be
-until several others have failed first. Armstrong did well all round,
-adopting a somewhat defensive game, with an occasional straight drive,
-very powerfully executed, and if he has a weak stroke it is the ball
-between his legs and the leg stump that he does not care about. Kelly
-was really excellent behind the stumps, and if occasion arose he was
-generally good for some runs. A great feature of his wicket-keeping
-was his absolute fairness of appeal; and this remark applies to the
-whole team. In regard to the test games I do not intend to write much,
-since they are all still fresh in our memory. The weather was very
-unsatisfactory, the two first games being drawn, whilst in the three
-finished games, at Sheffield, Manchester, and the Oval, rain was of no
-use to our chances of a win, generally managing to come at the wrong
-time for us; but this is all in the game. Had it remained fine, I feel
-very confident that three days would not have been sufficient to finish
-the matches; and in my opinion the addition of half an hour, which
-necessitated the luncheon interval being taken at 1.30, handicapped the
-bowler, since 4-1/4 hours were left for play afterwards—a very long
-spell when no interval for refreshments was allowed. A rest, however,
-was agreed upon later, with good results too, as the bowler generally
-obtained his wicket after the interval. The first test, at Birmingham,
-ended disappointingly, for after a very poor start on our part, which
-Tyldesley and the Hon. F. S. Jackson set right, we scored 376 for nine
-wickets, when we declared our innings closed. Tyldesley played a fine
-forcing game for 138, and from the time when the Hon. F. S. Jackson and
-he got together, everything went right for us, Hirst, Lockwood, and
-Rhodes all playing excellent cricket. Owing to the rain which followed
-our innings, our opponents had very little chance of drawing level,
-but no one was prepared for the poor display of their batsmen, the
-whole side being sent back for 36. Rhodes did what he liked with his
-opponents, although the ball was not turning to any great extent, as
-the wicket was quite on the wet side, and by no means unplayable. The
-Australians adopted a hitting game, but the first attempt at a drive,
-no matter whose it was, ended disastrously, without exception. Hirst
-also did well, his three wickets costing 15. Rhodes had the excellent
-analysis of seven wickets for 17, his bowling being very accurate,
-whilst he suited his pace to the wicket admirably. Owing to more rain,
-only half an hour more play took place, the Australians losing two
-wickets for 46. There is no doubt in my mind that our opponents were
-nowhere near their proper form at this time, and that the team without
-Trumble was something like cod-fish without oyster sauce. At Lord’s
-there was another disastrous start, which righted itself, when copious
-rain put an end to further play. At Sheffield we had a great game. Our
-opponents, winning the toss, did fairly well in compiling 194, Noble
-making the highest score, 47, whilst Barnes, who came in for Lockwood,
-bowled best of our men on a wicket possessed of considerable life. It
-suited his style of bowling admirably, and he took six wickets for 49.
-Braund did what little he had to do very well, commencing by clean
-bowling Trumper for 1. It has been stated that a grave mistake was made
-in leaving Lockwood out; with those of that opinion I do not agree—and
-no one has a higher opinion of the Surrey bowler than myself. In the
-week before the test match he secured but two wickets, and one of those
-occasions was the match against Lancashire, whilst the other game was
-that against Yorkshire. It was not Lockwood at all who bowled at Old
-Trafford. At the end of the first day’s play we had scored 102 for
-five wickets, but owing to a sharp shower in the night, the wicket was
-soft on the top the next morning, and our last five men added but 43.
-After the heavy roller had been over the pitch it played beautifully,
-all devil having been taken out of it, which made the one man Barnes,
-who had been so successful in the first innings, practically harmless,
-since he has never been seen to advantage, in big cricket, with
-the fire out of the wicket. Hill and Trumper went along at a great
-pace, all our bowlers catching it, F. S. Jackson securing both their
-wickets, but not until Trumper had made 62 and Hill 119. Well as both
-men played, the bowling in this innings, as in the first innings at
-Manchester, was, to say the least, very moderate. With the exception of
-Hopkins, no one of the remaining players caused much trouble, Rhodes
-finishing up by taking four wickets in 19 balls. But those of us near
-the wickets knew why, for F. S. Jackson, who had kept an excellent
-length for some time at that end, suddenly made two balls nip back very
-quickly, and then the left-hander was immediately brought on. In fact,
-the moment the wicket broke up at that end, Rhodes made full use of his
-opportunity, as did the Australians when they got us at the wickets,
-Noble on the last day, from the end which Rhodes had bowled, being
-every bit as difficult, and taking six wickets for 52. It was only
-due to Jessop’s hitting that we scored 195. As I had the luck to stay
-there as long as any one, I know what I am writing about, and I have
-no hesitation in saying that the wicket suddenly went all to pieces
-from the moment that Jackson made the ball turn quickly. Noble also did
-this to some purpose, making it kick up, too, very sharply, as on the
-occasion when Jackson was bowled off his chest. In our second innings
-I do not blame our batsmen in the least. Noble was seen at his best in
-both innings, whilst Saunders did as well as he in the first innings.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER X
-
-UNIVERSITY CRICKET
-
-By HOME GORDON and H. D. G. LEVESON-GOWER
-
-
-To thousands who have never been near the banks of the Cam or the
-Isis, “the ‘Varsity match” forms one of the episodes of each recurring
-year. It is a social festival; perhaps, also, it is the last great
-manifestation of cricket as a game, and not as a money-making business,
-which is to be found among first-class fixtures. But the University
-match is more than this, for it is the Mecca of all who have gone
-down from Oxford or Cambridge, the opportunity for the renewal of
-former acquaintances, possibly the only occasion when you come across
-those who were amongst your greatest friends in the day of _arcades
-ambo_. It is good to meet old comrades, good to hear the ring of the
-old jests, good to see how time is treating those who are your own
-contemporaries—ay, and good to give one kindly thought to those who
-have drifted to all the quarters of the Empire, and to remember those
-who have been removed from us by Death.
-
-The University match is, however, more than an excuse for reunion.
-It is the battle of the “Blues,” the struggle between eleven picked
-representatives of Oxford and the eleven contemporary delegates of
-Cambridge. All old University men, and all the undergraduates of
-to-day, with their families, relations, and friends, young and old,
-unite in shouting for their own side. It is as cheery a display of
-enthusiasm as one could care to show to that hypothetical individual,
-“the intelligent foreigner”—the foreigner one really encounters being
-“a chiel amang us takin’ notes” for hostile purposes. But little care
-we for international complications when Blue meets Blue. It is a grim,
-grand struggle for mastery, and some illustration of the evenness of
-the fight can be gathered from the fact that after sixty-eight contests
-Cambridge should only lead by four.
-
-But the value of the University match exceeds all yet indicated, for
-it is the supreme and unsullied manifestation of genuine amateurism.
-When cricket is degenerating into a business, when too many eke out a
-pseudo-amateurism in unsatisfactory ways, when individuals play for
-their averages and sides play against the clock, we hail the University
-match as the recurrent triumph of the true amateur, the keenest,
-manliest, most entrancing, and most spirited match of the year—and
-likewise the one haloed by the richest traditions. All these views are
-apt to be forgotten when county committees are clamouring for valuable
-Blues to neglect their University trial matches in order to help their
-shires in championship fixtures. That is why this article is heralded
-by a pæan of genuine enthusiasm, and it is this that we would say to
-undergraduates in years to come—you may represent your county as long
-as your purse and your skill permit, but no living man can participate
-in thirty-six matches for Oxford or for Cambridge, nor more than four
-times meet the opposing Blues. Therefore, take University cricket as
-the happy fruit of early manhood, and believe that nothing in after
-years is quite equal, quite identical with its delightful experiences.
-
-With these preliminary observations concluded, let us first see where
-the game is played. Of course the University struggle is at Lord’s, and
-probably every one who reads the present volume, even if he has not
-been himself to headquarters, has a pretty good idea of what the ground
-is like. Even in the last twenty years it has undergone a number of
-changes in order to bring it to the level of latter-day requirements.
-Of course the original picturesqueness of the surroundings has been
-impaired. The present pavilion has been ingloriously compared to a
-railway station. The extension of the grand stand has rendered all the
-north side unsightly, and the huge mound at the south-east corner looks
-like part of the auditorium at Earl’s Court. Even the tennis-court has
-been shifted. But all said and done, 15,000 people can get a decent
-view of the game at Lord’s, and the turf itself has been improved
-beyond measure. Time was when the pitch at Lord’s was proverbially
-treacherous, and old scores bear eloquent testimony to this. To-day
-a superb wicket can be provided for a big match, one equal to any in
-England, despite the fact that comparatively few drawn games take place
-at St. John’s Wood.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Aquatint by_ _Francis Jukes._
-_SALVADORE HOUSE, TOOTING, SURREY._
-(_After a Drawing by John Walker, end 18th Century_).]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Drawing_ _by Crowhurst._
-_CRICKET GROUND, TODMORDEN._]
-
-So much for the meeting-place. Now for the trial-grounds of the rival
-Blues. In this respect, Oxford had far more difficulty than their
-rivals. The earliest grounds used by the Dark Blues were those of the
-Bullingdon Club and of the Magdalen College School. The Bullingdon
-ground, on the site of the present barracks, was at a goodly distance
-from the town, but possessed some of the finest turf in the kingdom.
-The Magdalen ground was a part of Cowley Common, and this was the
-first enclosure ever leased to the Oxford University Cricket Club.
-With a few individual digressions, there the bulk of the home fixtures
-were contested until, in 1881, the University settled down on its own
-admirable ground in the University Parks. A hard, fast pitch could be
-obtained, in a central situation, with an excellent practice-ground
-always available, while a commodious pavilion, exactly behind the
-wicket, affords those in authority, and the legion who love to give
-gratuitous advice, an admirable position from which to watch the
-trial matches. Though not as yet dealing with the fixtures, it may
-be broadly stated—without fear of contradiction—that the Oxford
-eleven has displayed far more cohesiveness since it has acquired a
-permanent establishment. Of course the fact that no gate-money can be
-taken militates against the quality of the professionals engaged on
-the ground-staff. It is a rule that only one home fixture shall have
-a charge for admission, and then the match is played on one of the
-College grounds, generally Christ Church, which affords the greatest
-accommodation. When the Australians come, their game is invariably the
-one selected. In other seasons it is usually a county match.
-
-Cambridge have been far more fortunate in the matter of a ground. The
-University originally played on Parker’s Piece—a huge village green;
-but in 1848, at the instigation of Lord Stamford and Lord Darnley,
-who considered the ground too public, as well as the tradition that
-the M.C.C. refused to appear again, because of the ill-mannered chaff
-of the spectators, F. P. Fenner induced the University to move to his
-spacious ground. The original pavilion, not built until 1856—and
-then at the trifling cost of £300—was replaced in 1875 by a handsome
-structure on which over £4000 has been expended. The University
-eventually obtained Fenner’s on an admirable lease, and the ground can
-be regarded as one of the finest in the country. Level and true, the
-pitch does not take the heart out of a batsman, while a bowler obtains
-all reasonable assistance. In estimating modern University cricket, it
-may be fairly considered that all undergraduates have every opportunity
-to train up to the best possible standard to which they can attain, and
-that, so far as expenses and wickets are concerned, they have, in the
-phrase of Mr. W. S. Gilbert, “nothing whatever to grumble at,” either
-at Oxford or Cambridge.
-
-In the view of the writers of the present section, there is no need
-to dilate at great length on the earlier history of the cricket at
-the two Universities. The old matches have been replayed by a score
-of pens since the stumps were originally drawn. I am not saying they
-were not as admirable as those of later years—indeed, I would at a
-pinch rather argue on the other side. But I do believe that those who
-will read the present volume take more interest in the cricket of the
-last twenty-five years than they feel in that of previous generations.
-Therefore it is not from want of appreciation that I deliberately incur
-the charge of treating in a condensed form the early battles of the
-Blues. Were a volume at my disposal, instead of a chapter, I would
-gladly act in a very different fashion.
-
-The University match was at first a friendly game rather than a serious
-contest. Numbers of people would be surprised at being told that Oxford
-had not always met Cambridge at Lord’s. But though the first match
-took place at St. John’s Wood in 1827, no less than five have been
-fought out at Oxford, either on the Magdalen, Bullingdon, or Cowley
-Marsh grounds, four of which were won by the home side. To this may
-be appended the following indications of the haphazard nature of the
-game. In 1836, when there had been no University match for six years,
-Cambridge lost by 121 runs, with two men absent; why, no contemporary
-troubled to set forth. In 1838 began the regular succession of annual
-encounters, but in a game won easily by Oxford there was one man absent
-in three out of the four innings. Next year, when Cambridge won by
-an innings and 125 runs—the top score in an aggregate of 287 being
-70 by Mr. Extras, followed by 65 by Mr. C. G. Taylor—the losers not
-only played one short throughout the match, but history does not even
-give a reason, nor does tradition state who the eleventh man should
-have been. Of the 46 wides sent down by Oxford, it was said, “the
-bowlers evidently at times lost their temper at not being enabled to
-disturb the wickets of their opponents.” But the greatest proportion of
-extras had been in 1836, when these amounted to 63 in Oxford’s second
-total of 200, and 55 in Cambridge’s first of 127, with 149 extras in
-an aggregate of 479. Against this must be set only 24 extras in an
-aggregate of 751, a creditable feature of the game of 1885.
-
-Among the early giants for Oxford may be cited Mr. Charles Wordsworth,
-subsequently Bishop of St. Andrews, who bowled fast left-hand lobs
-twisting in from the off. To him appears to have been due much of
-the organisation of the big match. The earliest cricketer from Oxford
-chosen to play for the Gentlemen was Mr. H. E. Knatchbull. A good many
-of the Dark Blue triumphs mid-way in the ‘forties were ascribed to the
-very fast round-arm bowling of Mr. G. E. Yonge, who, in five matches
-_v._ Cambridge, removed the bails thirty times, in all capturing
-forty-three opponents. This is the parallel of the terrific devastation
-wrought by that very fine bowler, Mr. A. H. Evans, who sent back
-thirty-six Cantabs for 13 runs apiece, twenty-two being clean bowled.
-Admit, too, the prowess of Mr. G. B. Lee, who in 1839 took nine of the
-ten wickets and scored a fifth of the Oxford aggregate. He was for
-many years Warden of Winchester College, and his death, which occurred
-on 29th January last, was deeply lamented by a great host of friends.
-The first of the cricket “families” who have made immortal names in
-University cricket was the Riddings. When two of the brothers played
-for Gentlemen _v._ Players in 1849, the elder long-stopping and the
-younger wicket-keeping to such tremendous bowling as that of Mr. G.
-E. Yonge and Mr. Harvey Fellowes, tradition says that nothing was
-seen like it until Mr. Gregor MacGregor put on the gloves to take the
-bowling of Mr. S. M. J. Woods. In 1849 the Gentlemen won by an innings
-and 40 runs, the biggest victory until 1878, and one mainly due to the
-Oxonian combination.
-
-The next family was that of the Marshams, a triumvirate whose
-achievements have been mentioned by every successive generation of
-Oxonians, and to which Cambridge could offer no parallel until the era
-of the Studds. Mr. A. Payne was a very fast bowler; so was Mr. Walter
-Fellowes. Among batsmen come Messrs. Reginald Hankey and W. H. Bullock,
-but towering above them stands Mr. C. G. Lane, whose name is enshrined
-among the pristine heroes of the Oval. Nor prior to 1860 must the
-prowess of Mr. Chandos Leigh, Mr. Arthur Cazenove, and Mr. W. F. Traill
-be forgotten.
-
-[Illustration: _CRICKET AT RUGBY IN 1837._]
-
-[Illustration: _CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS PLAYING CRICKET IN
-1842._]
-
-The Light Blue giants up to this time had also been notable. The
-earliest of great fame is Mr. C. G. Taylor, a batsman of great repute,
-an old Etonian, who was an adept at nearly every sport. With him must
-be associated Mr. J. H. Kirwan, a very fast amateur bowler, “with a
-low delivery which approached a jerk, but was allowed.” No matter how
-he was hit, he persisted in keeping his fieldsmen behind the wicket,
-ready for catches. Mr. T. A. Anson appears to have been the earliest of
-the famous Cambridge stumpers, but his renown pales before that of Mr.
-E. S. Hartopp, “the only man who could stop the famous fast deliveries
-of Mr. Harvey Fellowes with any degree of certainty.” What that meant
-on the old-time bad wickets may be estimated by the fact that, when
-there was some discussion about pace, it was the unanimous consensus of
-those old enough to judge that Mr. Fellowes had never been equalled for
-lightning speed. Eton provided the next Cambridge bowler of importance,
-Mr. E. W. Blore, whose pace was slow, with an excellent length. More
-famous, of course, is Mr. David Buchanan, who in his University days
-was a fast left-handed bowler. By the way, he himself confessed that
-he would not remain a fortnight “kicking his heels about” in order
-to play in the University match of 1851. His marvellous prowess with
-the ball was altogether apart from his undergraduate career, though
-he captured six Oxonian wickets in 1850. Mr. Mat Kempson, who hailed
-from Cheltenham, was a clever fast bowler, with so much spin on his
-ball that he was the only cricketer George Parr could not hit to leg.
-It is said that while he and Canon J. M’Cormick were together, they
-never lost an eleven-a-side match at Cambridge. The feat of Mr. M.
-Kempson and Sir Francis Bathurst, bowling unchanged for the Gentlemen
-against the Players, has only been equalled by the two Cantabs, Messrs.
-S. M. J. Woods and F. S. Jackson, in 1894, and by A. H. Evans and A.
-G. Steel, who, in the Gentlemen _v._ Players match in 1879, dismissed
-a strong side of players for 73 and 48, both being then in residence
-at their Universities. Mr. E. T. Drake, with bat and lob bowling, was
-esteemed by his contemporaries as only second to Mr. V. E. Walker.
-
-The name with which Cambridge cricket will be historically associated
-in the nineteenth century is that of Mr. Arthur Ward. He weighed 20
-stones when he played for Cambridge, and was so much chaffed by the
-crowd at Lord’s that in 1854 he managed the match from the pavilion.
-But to him is due the acquisition of Fenner’s, where he reigned as an
-autocrat, despotic but delightful. He has been even as much to his old
-University as Mr. Thomas Case, wise, vigilant, and full of foresight,
-has been to Oxford cricket. The twain will never be forgotten, and
-unborn generations should breathe benedictions upon them.
-
-Two successive secretaries of M.C.C. represented Cambridge in 1854. One
-was that delightful personality and sturdy hitter, Mr. R. Fitzgerald.
-The team he took to America in 1872 was the parent of many tours in
-many climes, all enjoyable, if not of such public importance as the
-great expeditions to Australia. He was succeeded at Lord’s by his
-friend of many years’ standing, Mr. Henry Perkins, who is to-day cheery
-in his honoured retirement after twenty-one years’ work, the full
-value of which was not entirely appreciated by the younger generations
-of M.C.C. until afterwards. In his day he must have been a keen good
-cricketer, and, considering how little he watched the modern game, and
-then always behind the pavilion windows, it is marvellous how he could
-so skilfully diagnose the skill of players. His kindness to quite young
-fellows fond of the game is one of those traits to which enough justice
-was not done at his retirement, possibly because the tributes came from
-older friends. It may be noted that Mr. T. W. Wills, who represented
-Cambridge _v._ Oxford in 1856, was never in residence. The group of
-cricketers who went up from Brighton College will always be memorable.
-In 1860 for Cambridge appeared Messrs. G. E. Cotterill, Denzil Onslow,
-A. E. Bateman, and E. B. Fawcett, as formidable a quartet as could
-be desired. Mainly owing to the spinning slow bowling of Mr. H. M.
-Plowden, the Cantabs won by three wickets on a soaking ground, with two
-of the best Oxford men too unwell to play.
-
-The next eighteen years can be regarded as the mid-Victorian section
-of University cricket. Preeminent from 1862 to 1865 was Mr. R. A. H.
-Mitchell, then absolutely the finest amateur bat in the country. He
-averaged 42 in seven innings against Cambridge, though his highest
-innings was only 57. He was a wonderful bat, timing the ball with
-something of the judgment of “W. G.,” though, like the champion, he was
-_never_ quite happy facing Alfred Shaw. Possibly no other amateur ever
-hit so well to leg, and he has the distinction of being the earliest
-of the great captains who developed the game according to our modern
-ideas. It was he, too, who gave Oxford four successive victories after
-four previous reverses. After he went down, Oxford had no star for some
-seasons, except that Sir Robert Reid proved as nimble behind the sticks
-as he has since been successful at the Bar and in Parliament.
-
-Cambridge in the same period had more men of mark. At the outset
-there were the erratic but devastating deliveries of Mr. T. Lang,
-who captured in all fifteen Oxford wickets for 84 runs, and for his
-University has the magnificent figures of forty-six wickets at a cost
-of 5.54 apiece. Then too flourished Lord Cobham, of whom Mr. Clement
-Booth—a veteran not given to rash assertions—states, “He was
-absolutely the best all-round cricketer I ever played with.” Note that
-Mr. Booth actually participated in first-class cricket—fine steady
-bat that he was—until 1887, and still keeps up his interest in the
-game. To collaborate with these three were Messrs. H. M. Marshall, A.
-W. T. Daniel, H. M. Plowden, an excellent slow bowler, and W. Bury,
-“who never missed a catch.” Truly was it said that the 1862 eleven was
-not surpassed until that of 1878. It will be noted that Cambridge was
-now enjoying the era of the Lytteltons, G. S., the second brother to
-Lord Cobham, coming up in 1866, and showing wonderful nerve in a trying
-finish in the following year. It was then the turn of the Light Blues
-to win for four successive encounters. Much of this was due to the
-great command of that eccentric free-lance Mr. C. A. Absalom over the
-ball. He was outside all laws of cricket convention, among other ethics
-of his being that a half-volley on the leg stump was the best delivery
-with which to attack a fresh batsman. Altogether he took one hundred
-wickets for 14 runs each as an undergraduate, and twenty-two wickets
-for 247 runs in his three encounters with Oxford. Of course he was
-utterly unorthodox as a bat too, but his hard hitting produced quite
-a respectable figure in the average-sheet of the Light Blues. Of his
-acrobatic agility in the field, it is safe to say that never will its
-like be seen again.
-
-Slightly senior to him was Mr. C. E. Green, the father of Essex
-cricket, and hardly had he gone down than Cambridge possessed one
-of the most remarkable groups of attractive players to be noted in
-our annals. This was in 1869—known, by the way, as the University
-wicket-keepers’ match, as the two stumpers, H. A. Richardson and W. A.
-Stewart, between them annexed fourteen out of the forty wickets. In
-that year Messrs. C. I. Thornton, W. Yardley, J. W. Dale, W. B. Money,
-H. A. Richardson, and C. A. Absalom all played for the Gentlemen. Of
-these, the repute of Mr. C. I. Thornton as a stupendous hitter has
-not even been dimmed by that of Mr. G. L. Jessop himself. For about
-thirty years “Buns” went in to slog, and undoubtedly succeeded. Some
-day, perhaps, when feats of hard hitting are collected, an adequate
-catalogue of his amazing feats may be presented. They will certainly
-prove unparalleled, and if others have hit as hard, possibly no one
-ever _drove_ with such mighty impetus. Nor, in even this brief allusion
-to his connection with University cricket, must it be forgotten what
-service he annually rendered in collecting strong scratch teams for his
-visits. It should be put on record that his two fine scores of 50 and
-36 were made against Oxford in 1869 by steady defensive cricket.
-
-Of “Bill of the Play,” it is difficult for us, who never saw him
-bat, to adequately write, when so many of our readers have been more
-fortunate. A very eminent judge, however, supplies this note:—“Yardley
-comes next to ‘W. G.’ among amateurs. Ranji may have produced new
-strokes, notably that astounding ‘hook,’ but his physique never
-gave him that impressive _command_ over the ball which was the
-characteristic of the elder Cantab. Yardley possessed all the grace
-of Palairet, with a strength equal to that of Ulyett. I should regard
-him as the perfection of really beautiful batting accompanied with
-remarkable power. He played all round the wicket, but he was stronger
-on the leg side than modern bats.”
-
-To Mr. Yardley belongs the unique distinction of having made two
-centuries in the University match, 100 in 1870 and 130 in 1872, the
-former being the first made in the game—oddly enough, at a time when
-he was supposed to be out of form—and the latter the highest, until
-Mr. K. J. Key passed it with his 143 in 1886. Mr. J. W. Dale was a
-stylish, pretty bat, while Mr. W. B. Money, besides being a clever lob
-bowler, was a good and often aggressive bat, though from nervousness
-he failed to do himself justice against the rival Blues. To all
-generations of cricketers, the Oxford and Cambridge match of 1870 will
-be known as “Cobden’s game,” despite the first recorded century. It
-was also true that the hat trick had also never been performed in the
-match, and Mr. F. C. Cobden now achieved it under almost miraculous
-conditions. Mr. Cobden bowled a good fast ball of the average type,
-nothing marvellous, and it is this one feat which has immortalised him.
-Oxford had a fine eleven, the match being a genuine battle with giants
-on both sides. The Dark Blues, to begin with, possessed in Mr. C. J.
-Ottaway one of the coolest and most skilled of defensive batsman. He
-belonged to the race of University stonewallers (the apotheosis of
-which was Mr. Eustace Crawley, who was an hour at the wicket without
-scoring, and in his second innings was another hour before he “broke
-his specs,” amid stentorian applause, only to be out with the very
-next ball, though the year before he had scored a century). Mr. A.
-T. Fortescue was an excellent, watchful bat, Messrs. Pauncefote and
-Townshend were useful, Mr. Walter Hadow a dangerous run-getter, and Mr.
-E. F. S. Tylecote a sound, clever batsman, and so fine a wicket-keeper
-that he has put on the gloves creditably in test matches. Moreover,
-that good bowler, Mr. C. K. Francis, was a bat that had to be reckoned
-with. On fourth hands Oxford needed 179 to win, and with Messrs.
-Fortescue and Ottaway scoring steadily, and Mr. Tylecote playing good
-cricket, the match looked a very hollow affair, despite the excellent
-bowling of Mr. E. E. Harrison-Ward.
-
-Over the concluding incidents there is some conflict of evidence, but
-it seems probable that the fact of an extension of the playing time
-having been agreed to affected the finish, the light becoming bad.
-When Mr. Ottaway was dismissed, Oxford needed 19 to win, with five
-wickets to fall. Subsequently Messrs. Townshend and Francis were sent
-back, but only 4 runs were required, with three wickets to fall. Then
-came Mr. Cobden’s sensational and renowned over. Off the first ball,
-Mr. F. H. Hill, who was well set, made a vigorous stroke which was so
-well fielded by Mr. A. Bourne that only a single was scored. Off the
-second ball Mr. S. E. Butler was sharply annexed by the same opponent.
-Mr. T. H. Belcher was bowled by the next delivery, and it is even now
-controversial whether clean or off his pads. Finally, in came Mr. W. A.
-Stewart, who was, under the circumstances, naturally extremely nervous,
-and the victorious bowler at once removed his bail, amid a scene of
-frantic excitement.
-
-Wonders now come in battalions, for in the very next University
-encounter was performed another feat never again or before achieved
-in this especial match. This was the capture of all ten wickets on
-a side. Whether much of the success was due to the ground is beside
-the question. The fact remains that Mr. S. E. Butler took all the ten
-Cantab wickets at a cost of 38 runs, and then claimed five more for
-57. He was a fast bowler, who on this occasion found a spot which made
-the ball keep very low, and on a difficult pitch he was absolutely
-unplayable. Oxford this season had the benefit of the fine batting
-of Lord Harris, the man who, next to Lord Hawke, has probably done
-more for cricket than any one else. He was a stylish, attractive bat,
-with brilliant strokes and great driving power. Few batsmen have
-performed better against fast bowling; but his prowess ripened by his
-association with Kent rather than in his University days. Still, the
-Cantabs possessed the bulk of the new cricketers. Mr. W. N. Powys, a
-rather fast left-handed bowler, had the splendid figures of twenty-four
-wickets for 153 runs, while the two Etonians, Messrs. George Longman
-and A. S. Tabor, acquired high repute as batsmen. The former was
-the more attractive, comparable in a later generation to Mr. Norman
-Druce, while the latter, though more cramped, also might have been the
-more difficult to dislodge. In 1872, both being freshmen, they were
-the earliest who ever put up a century for the first wicket in the
-University match.
-
-The next triumph of Oxford came in 1875. This was due to Mr. A. W.
-Ridley, whose lobs were preternaturally successful at the crisis.
-Both sides carried men famed in the game. Mr. A. J. Webbe has in some
-measure occupied a unique position. Apart from his high repute as a
-batsman, he has devoted himself with assiduity to cricket at both
-Oxford and Harrow, in many ways materially influencing cricket, apart
-from his illustrious connection with Middlesex. Others to be noted were
-Mr. Vernon Royle, possibly the grandest field who ever donned flannels,
-Mr. W. H. Game, a big hitter, apt to prove disappointing, and Mr. T.
-W. Lang, who, besides being an admirable bowler, had trained into a
-very useful bat. Mr. Ridley as a bat, too, was a delightful exponent of
-the best Etonian traditions. Cambridge, however, enjoyed the services
-of some wonderful cricketers. In his quiet, patient, yet admirable
-method, how few can have excelled Mr. A. P. Lucas! Seven-and-twenty
-years after the match in question, a junior among the last Australian
-team expressed his opinion that Mr. Lucas was among the first flight of
-English batsmen of to-day. One critic has judiciously remarked that he
-never attempts to place a ball, or he would have scored three times
-as many runs, but for sheer accuracy who can ever have surpassed him?
-A colleague was Mr. Edward Lyttelton, most famous but one of all the
-family—a fine bat, remarkably free, a magnificent field anywhere, with
-heart and soul in the game. Mr. F. F. J. Greenfield, unorthodox but
-capable, was another useful man, and the bowling rested mainly on W. S.
-Patterson.
-
-The sensation of the match in which all these participated was in
-the close finish. Cambridge, needing 174 to win, had reached 161 for
-seven wickets, everything having gone in their favour until Mr. Webbe
-caught out Mr. Lyttelton in the country, a catch which many judges
-still watching the game think was the finest they ever witnessed. Mr.
-W. H. Game persuaded his captain, Mr. A. W. Ridley, to go on with lobs
-at this crisis. “It was much against my own judgment. My first ball
-got rid of W. S. Patterson; then Macan came in and made a single off
-the next. This brought Sims to my end, and he hit my third ball clean
-over my head for four. Lang then bowled against Macan, who kicked a
-leg-bye, and afterwards a no-ball made it seven to win. It was now that
-Sims was caught, and Arthur Smith came in. He looked rather shaky,
-and no wonder. He managed to keep his wicket intact for two balls,
-but my third bowled him, amid terrific excitement.” Thus Mr. A. W.
-Ridley himself, in reply to the request for his own reminiscence for an
-article in the _Badminton Magazine_. His modest impression deserves to
-be resurrected here. Mr. Edward Lyttelton has stated that the ball with
-which the victorious lob bowler dismissed each of his victims was “a
-straight low one on the leg stump which did not turn an inch.” Of the
-match in 1876 it may be stated that Mr. W. S. Patterson was the first
-“centurion” to be undefeated, and Mr. W. H. Game, the first Oxonian to
-run into three figures against Cambridge, though in the following year
-his example was followed by Mr. F. M. Buckland. It may be pointed out
-that Oxford from 1871 to 1875 and Cambridge from 1876 to 1880 each won
-four victories, interrupted by one defeat. In 1876 each University had
-won an equal number of matches.[5]
-
-1878 was the first year of modern cricket as generally accepted, but
-it was hardly more notable for the first visit of the Australians
-than for the unrivalled ability of the Cambridge eleven. They played
-eight matches, and won them all, a result as much due to magnificent
-fielding as to any other cause. Of course the phenomenal agency was the
-marvellous skill of Mr. A. G. Steel, but this great exponent of every
-department of the game was admirably backed up by the whole side. They
-opened by defeating Mr. C. I. Thornton’s eleven, which included Dr. W.
-G. Grace and his younger brother, as well as Mycroft and Midwinter, by
-79 runs, though 90 runs behind on first hands. Single-innings victories
-were gained over M.C.C. and the Gentlemen, while Yorkshire was disposed
-of by a margin of ten wickets. Migrating to the Oval, Surrey fell to
-the tune of an innings and 112, while M.C.C., strongly represented at
-Lord’s, were left in a minority of 106. Although Messrs. A. J. Webbe
-and A. H. Evans appeared for Oxford, the University match was felt to
-be one-sided, and so it proved. Mr. A. D. Greene took four hours and
-ten minutes to get 35 runs, while in the second effort Messrs. A. G.
-Steel and P. H. Morton sent the whole side back for 32. Finally the
-Cantabs, though deprived of the great services of Mr. A. P. Lucas, beat
-the Australians before lunch on the second day by an innings and 72
-runs. In emphasising this startling succession of victories, it ought
-to be pointed out that only once did opponents exceed a total of 127,
-and then the aggregate was only 193, while six sides were dismissed for
-less than 70 runs apiece.
-
-Now for the doughty team which Mr. Edward Lyttelton led so admirably.
-Be it noted that he was the only Englishman who in 1878 scored a
-century against the Australians. To him, and to Mr. A. P. Lucas,
-allusion has already been made. To do adequate justice to the great
-game always played by Mr. A. G. Steel is beyond our pens. Suffice
-it to say that the true panegyric lies in his magnificent record.
-In connection with Cambridge in 1878, he headed both tables, taking
-seventy-five wickets for 7 runs apiece, and averaging 37 for an
-aggregate of 339. At that time his bowling was incomparably difficult,
-mainly because of the way he used to vary his “pitch and break.” Never
-did any attack need such careful watching. His batting, of course,
-reached its climax in that superb 148 _v._ Australians at Lord’s in
-1884, and its most brilliant piece of fireworks when he went in ninth
-at Scarborough, and scored a century while the others made 7. But it
-was not even his skill which made Mr. A. G. Steel so great. It was his
-masterly and inspiriting confidence, together with an unparalleled
-grasp of the game, which made him the greatest amateur after “W. G.”
-that we have looked on.
-
-Following him must come Mr. Alfred Lyttelton, a great wicket-keeper,
-who would have been greater still, had he not appeared in the
-transition stage between long-stopping and standing up to the bowlers.
-He was also a really free and attractive bat, who could force the
-game well. Mr. P. H. Morton would nowadays be regarded as only a
-medium-paced bowler, whose difficulty arose from the speed at which
-his ball came off the pitch, whilst it was doing a great deal. His
-career in cricket was practically bounded by his time at Cambridge, in
-connection with which his bowling will always be worthily remembered.
-Mr. Herbert Whitfeld proved somewhat of a stonewaller type, shaping
-with admirable correctness, and in the field has known no superior.
-Hon. Ivo Bligh (now Lord Darnley) only lacked good health. As a bat he
-was an almost perfect exponent of Etonian traditions, so long as he
-could play forward. We are of opinion that his cutting was at times
-harder than that of any other amateur. Mr. D. Q. Steel had his days;
-batsmen of his reckless temperament must have a heavy percentage of
-failures. But for fine play all round the wicket, when he was in the
-vein, he could be commended as a positive peril to any opponents.
-Mr. A. F. J. Ford could hit “high, hard, and often,” bowl a useful
-change, and catch opponents in the slips with the facility and length
-of reach subsequently displayed by Tunnicliffe. Mr. L. K. Jarvis was
-an attractive bat, but was a good deal more dangerous on a fast wicket
-than a slow. Finally, Mr. F. W. Kingston, who could put on the gloves
-with considerable credit, was a sound, careful bat, who used to play
-the old “draw” stroke with notable ability. But after all, it was the
-cohesion and the fielding which made 1878 _the_ Cambridge eleven _par
-excellence_.
-
-Not much noteworthy happened in 1879, a season that maintained its
-unpleasant record for wetness and chilliness until 1902 relegated
-all previous experiences into mere episodes. But 1880 saw the Studds
-following the Steels and Lytteltons into the Cambridge eleven. There
-was always an element of uncertainty about Mr. G. B. Studd, but he
-was often a really brilliant bat and brilliant field at cover-point.
-As for Mr. C. T. Studd, he is the greatest amateur between Mr. A. G.
-Steel and Mr. S. M. J. Woods. Few men have ever played cricket with
-such accuracy. Those who have seen J. T. Hearne pitch ball after ball
-with mechanical precision at Lord’s can realise how Mr. C. T. Studd
-used to bowl, only slower. His batting was never perhaps so sound as
-that of Mr. C. B. Fry, but that is the nearest contemporary type; only
-the style of Mr. Studd was one absolutely satisfactory to witness. The
-game sustained a national loss when he left it to undertake missionary
-labour in Asia. Mr. J. E. K. Studd, who came into the Cambridge
-eleven a year later, thus establishing a record of three brothers
-all simultaneously playing for their University, was never so good
-as either of the others, but he was a hard-working cricketer, and a
-difficult bat to dislodge, while his punishing powers were of no mean
-order.
-
-In 1881 both teams were powerful, the public opinion that Cambridge
-were far the stronger being quite properly reversed. Three innings of
-the match were moderate, principally because the Cantabs all drew away
-from the fast bowling of Mr. A. H. Evans, who claimed thirteen wickets
-for 10 runs apiece. But the grandest feature was the innings of 107
-by Mr. W. H. Patterson, who carried his bat clean through the second
-Oxford innings, although suffering from a badly-injured hand. It was
-one of the greatest innings ever played at Lord’s, and foreshadowed
-the fine service he subsequently rendered to Kent. That brilliant
-disappointment, Mr. C. F. H. Leslie, whose phenomenal batting at Rugby
-evoked anticipations never realised, played a splendid innings of 70,
-his partnership with the old Harrovian arresting the succession of
-Cantab victories, which were destined to be resumed for the next two
-years. A conspicuous Oxonian recruit was Mr. M. C. Kemp, a capital
-wicket-keeper, and a most lively, not to say venturesome, bat, and
-a wonderful judge of a run. But it was his exciting personality and
-wonderful enthusiasm which made him of such moral value to any side.
-That attractive Wykehamist bat, Mr. A. H. Trevor, unfortunately elected
-to watch rather than to play cricket after he went down from college.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Water-Colour, attributed to_ _G. Cruickshank._
-_THE CORINTHIANS AT LORDS IN 1822._]
-
-1882 saw a striking contrast between the treatment meted out to
-the two Universities by the greatest of all Australian teams. Mr.
-Murdoch’s combination opened their campaign on the Christ Church
-ground, and the Colonial who took first ball scored 202. This was that
-magnificent batsman, Mr. H. H. Massie. Mr. E. D. Shaw alone of the
-home side could offer much resistance, as was also the case in the
-first innings against Cambridge. Although this match was on 15th May,
-ten Oxford blues were on the home side, the eleventh man being that
-energetic, if erratic, bowler, Mr. C. J. M. Godfrey. Cambridge gave
-a vastly different exhibition. Mr. C. T. Studd signalised his first
-appearance against an Australian eleven by scoring 118 and taking
-eight wickets. The triumvirate of brothers were responsible for 297
-out of 393 from the bat, and thus had a large share in the triumphant
-victory by six wickets, the only defeat of the Colonials till 11th
-August. The slow bowling of Mr. R. C. Ramsey, an old Harrovian, himself
-a Queenslander, had also much to do with the success, for he claimed
-twelve wickets for 179 runs. On 17th August, for the first time,
-Cambridge Past and Present met the Australians, and, after one of the
-most spirited contests, effected a victory by 20 runs. The bowling of
-Mr. A. G. Steel and Mr. C. H. Alcock—who never obtained his blue—and
-fine batting by Mr. Alfred Lyttelton against Messrs. Spofforth and
-Boyle at their deadliest, were the main agencies. That phenomenal 66
-of Mr. G. J. Bonnor, compiled in half an hour with four sixes and
-six fours, was one of the most astounding things ever perpetrated
-in cricket. The University match was a good one, including a really
-artistic 120 from Mr. G. B. Studd, fine form in both departments from
-his more illustrious brother, and an innings of great force from one
-of the hardest hitters who ever played at Lord’s, Mr. Henery, a man
-of iron strength though diminutive physique. Lord Hawke, then merely
-an energetic and interesting bat, was not in his University days so
-valuable a cricketer as afterwards. Indeed, his powers steadily ripen
-with years, and in 1902, at the age of forty-two, he batted at the Oval
-in grander style than ever before, although down at Taunton they say
-his 126 against Somersetshire was the best innings of all. Long may he
-continue to advance. The day of his retirement will prove a sad blow to
-cricket throughout the country. On the Oxford side, Mr. J. G. Walker
-was nothing like the fine bat to which he afterwards trained on, but at
-point he has rarely been matched, save by Dr. E. M. Grace.
-
-Though Cambridge won in 1883, the side was by no means phenomenal. Mr.
-C. W. Wright, who was remarkably effective during his residence at
-Trinity, was the “centurion,” and Messrs. C. T. Studd and C. A. Smith
-were responsible for the attack. The latter was a vigorous, bustling
-cricketer, whose curious method of approaching the wicket has rarely
-been emulated. Of the Oxonians the most notable newcomer was Mr. H.
-V. Page, a bat with fine nerve, and an equally fine “pull” stroke,
-keen field, and by no means bad bowler, perfectly indifferent to
-punishment. Considering that the phenomenally stubborn Mr. C. W. Rock
-obtained his blue in 1884, most imperturbable of bats, and destined
-a year or two later to be about the best contemporary amateur bowler
-(of moderately medium pace, be it mentioned), and further, that two
-notable county captains, Messrs. H. W. Bainbridge and F. Marchant, both
-old Etonians, came into the eleven, it is hard to say why Cambridge
-was so poor. But the fact remains, they were somewhat of a slack side,
-and neither of the Etonians was then the masterly exponent of batting
-which in diverging ways they subsequently became. Oxford had a big
-repute, including the sensational presence of Mr. (now Sir) T. C.
-O’Brien, who, having gone into residence solely to get his blue, had
-the memorable misfortune to bag a brace. Mr. B. E. Nicholls, a senior
-from Winchester, was perfectly extraordinary in the slips; against the
-Australians, for example, he nipped no less than seven catches. But
-the comparative falling off of the two Universities can be gathered
-from the fact that no one from either team represented the Gentlemen
-against the Colonials in either match, though three Oxonians were on
-the victorious side against the Players at Lord’s.
-
-The Cambridge victory of 1885 was due to some Oxonian half-heartedness
-in shaping at Mr. C. Toppin at the outset, and to a partnership of 142
-by Messrs. C. W. Wright and H. W. Bainbridge, who just ran into the
-coveted three figures. Cricket was played to a different tune next
-year, when two great Oxonians effected a stand of 243. The heroes of
-this were Mr. K. J. Key and Mr. W. Rashleigh. The burly successor to
-Mr. J. Shuter as Surrey skipper was in his third year, and at that
-time was a singularly fine bat. It may be confidently asserted that no
-other amateur of the present generation has so triumphantly exploited
-the “pull,” and he played the game with cheery energy. Mr. Rashleigh,
-who at Tonbridge had been as sensational as Mr. Leslie a few years
-before at Rugby, did great things for Kent, but nothing better than
-this fine display. Those who note with bewilderment that no one else
-ran into double figures in the Oxonian total of 304 ought to be told
-that the side purposely played themselves out. Finely as Mr. Bainbridge
-again played (his scores were 44 and 79), his side was hopelessly
-unsuccessful, but the absurdity of playing Mr. C. M. Knatchbull
-Hugessen remains to all time the biggest blunder in University
-selection, for there was already a deft stumper in Mr. L. Orford.
-Both that match and a year later that genial sportsman and capable
-cricketer, Mr. E. H. Buckland, bowled best for victorious Oxford.
-
-The match of 1887 is known as “the last choice game.” The eleventh
-place in each team was only filled at the latest possible moment. The
-Light Blue final selection, Mr. Eustace Crawley, scored 33 and 103
-not out, and the Dark Blue one, Lord George Scott, contributed 100
-and 66. Oxford fielded superbly, and their new wicket-keeper, Mr. H.
-Phillipson, was absolutely one of the finest who has ever donned the
-gloves, and it is a great pity that his impetuosity and tremendous
-punishing powers overpowered his otherwise remarkable capacity as
-a bat, which at Eton caused him to be regarded as exceptionally
-excellent. Deplorably weak bowling on both sides left the Light Blues
-in the minority only because of their liberality in the matter of
-dropped catches.
-
-In 1888 Cambridge obtained the assistance of two amateurs whose
-combined services will be remembered as long as the game is played.
-These were of course Messrs. Gregor MacGregor and S. M. J. Woods.
-Undoubtedly in his prime the Scotchman has never had a rival among
-amateur wicket-keepers, except Mr. Blackham. The way he used to take
-Mr. S. M. J. Woods, the way too in which he handled the deliveries
-of Mr. C. J. Kortright for the Gentlemen, will never be forgotten by
-those who witnessed them. He was also a stubborn bat, who came off when
-things were at their worst, and he remains one of the distinguished
-cricketers of his lengthy period. Even more emphatically can this
-be remarked of Mr. S. M. J. Woods. The value of his bowling may be
-gathered from his analysis in his seven University innings, when his
-victims were 36, at a cost of under 9 runs apiece; moreover, for
-Cambridge he annexed 190 opponents at a cost of 14 runs each. To say
-that he was a terror is but to be truthful. His great break back, in
-combination with great pace, with a magnificent slow ball, made him for
-many years unrivalled as a fast bowler. A magnificent field, gathering
-the ball as he rushed in to meet it, and a great hitter, in those days
-somewhat less judicious than when so serviceable to Somersetshire, he
-combined all the aptitudes of a redoubtable cricketer. As a combination
-of bowler and wicket-keeper, in University cricket, Messrs. Woods
-and MacGregor have no parallel. But as often happens, the two stars
-gathered some notable men into their constellation.
-
-Senior among these must be named Mr. F. G. J. Ford, youngest and
-best cricketer in a family of sportsmen. Like all big hitters, more
-especially perhaps left-handers, he was uncertain. During his four
-years at Cambridge he was not, except at Brighton, the terrifically
-punishing bat he subsequently became. But he was in those days a very
-useful bowler, as well as a formidable run-getter. Mr. R. C. Gosling,
-an excellent bat of the Eton type, actually was not dismissed by Oxford
-until his third University match, a curious feat for a man going in
-seventh. Another Etonian bat, but essentially fast wicket player, was
-Mr. C. P. Foley, who fairly won the match of 1891 by his steadiness.
-An even better bat was Mr. R. N. Douglas, whose play was freer than
-subsequently for Middlesex, and who was always attractive. Mr. E.
-C. Streatfield would have taken prominent rank, had he really cared
-more for the game. Batting with a trace of the style which made him a
-capital racquet-player, he could lay about him with perilous rapidity,
-whilst his fine bowling claimed five for 14 when Oxford was dismissed
-for 42, and his ball removed the bails each time. It would be idle
-to suggest that at Cambridge Mr. D. L. A. Jephson showed much of the
-great ability he subsequently developed. Indeed, he only once scored
-50, and his over-arm bowling was far below the standard of his later
-lobs. But his fielding was invariably excellent. Mr. A. J. L. Hill was
-an excellent all-round cricketer. His placing was always excellent,
-and his dash in meeting the ball, and when bowling his capacity for
-suddenly sending in a ball which whipped back unexpectedly quick,
-proved that he was of value in all departments. Finally comes Mr. F. S.
-Jackson. Possessing a huge school reputation at Harrow, he did not at
-first effect any sensational cricket. A steady fast bowler and sound
-bat, was perhaps all that could be reported until his third year, when
-he became captain, and signalised his skipperdom by heading both tables
-of averages. In 1893 he improved materially on his batting figures, and
-was by this time recognised as the great cricketer whose finest triumph
-was his batting at the pinch in the test matches of 1902. A phenomenal
-self-reliance has always characterised his play, but it is certain
-that since Mr. S. M. J. Woods no such fine all-round amateur has come
-into prolonged participation in good matches.
-
-It may be noted, with reference to a contemporary cry of the difficulty
-of freshmen in getting their blues, that in 1890 there were five
-vacancies in the Cambridge eleven, and the five freshmen who appeared
-in the first match, _v._ C. I. Thornton’s eleven, all obtained their
-colours. These were Messrs. R. N. Douglas, E. C. Streatfield, D. L. A.
-Jephson, F. S. Jackson, and A. J. L. Hill. In the second innings of the
-game just mentioned, Mr. S. M. J. Woods took all ten wickets for under
-7 runs apiece, after capturing five for only 19 runs in the first.
-Going to Brighton that year, Cambridge scored 703 for nine wickets, the
-chief scores being: Mr. F. G. J. Ford 191, Mr. G. MacGregor 131, Mr. C.
-P. Foley 117, Mr. R. N. Douglas 84 and 62, and Mr. F. S. Jackson 60.
-Next year the Light Blues against Sussex totalled 359 and 366, without
-an individual century. In all probability no University ever had such
-strenuous games with a county as Cambridge about this period played
-with Surrey, then in the zenith of their fame.
-
-Now occurs the opportunity to refer to two incidents which created an
-enormous sensation, and eventually led to an alteration in the law
-of following on. The facts can be briefly put. Oxford in 1893 needed
-8 runs to save the follow-on, when the last men were at the wicket.
-The Cambridge captain, Mr. F. S. Jackson, instructed Mr. C. M. Wells
-to bowl a no-ball to the boundary, and after the batsman, Mr. W. H.
-Brain, had covered a very wide ball, to send down one even more off
-the wicket. In 1896 Oxford needed 12 runs to save the follow-on, when
-Mr. R. P. Lewis, a notoriously bad bat, came in eleventh. Mr. F.
-Mitchell then told Mr. E. B. Shine to bowl two no-balls, each of which
-went to the boundary for four, and then a ball which scored four for
-byes. The hostile demonstration from the pavilion was one of the most
-demoralising ever heard on a cricket ground. In sober truth it must be
-confessed that the captains were within their legal rights in ordering
-unprecedented action to obviate the possibility of their opponents
-purposely getting out. Yet all that is not forbidden by law cannot
-be perpetrated without censure. Having written so much, we prefer
-to pass on, glad to have briefly finished our allusion to the only
-unpleasantness in the long series of University matches.
-
-[Illustration: _A MATCH IN 1805._]
-
-Oxford now demands some attention, for Cambridge has latterly held
-the chief place in these pages. Mr. M. R. Jardine was not successful
-until his fourth season, when he amassed a valuable 140, thus redeeming
-long-deferred expectations. Yet at all times it was felt that the
-runs he saved by his wonderful fielding were of more value than those
-he made from the bat. Two cricketers who have been before the public
-ever since, and who in different ways have proved notable exponents of
-batting, are Messrs. E. Smith and L. C. H. Palairet. The latter must to
-the present generation be the pre-eminent example of distinction and
-graceful perfection. Mr. Ernest Smith has always been a redoubtable
-and rapid run-getter, making his scores without apparent exertion, yet
-contriving to entirely baffle the opposing captain by the pertinacious
-skill with which he places his rapid hits. As a fast bowler he enjoyed
-days of great success, and was always efficient in the field. A senior
-from Winchester, only participating in one University match, was Mr.
-V. T. Hill. Left-handed, and possessing much of the dash and vigour of
-Mr. H. T. Hewett, he hit 114 in 1892 in a fashion which frankly earned
-the epithet sensational. Possibly owing to the exceptional interest it
-always arouses, the encounters of the Blues have produced a remarkable
-number of notable innings, but none surpasses that of Mr. Hill in
-vigour and “fireworks.” It was altogether a great game, that of 1892.
-Oxford, having lost Mr. Palairet and Mr. R. T. Jones without a run on
-the board, amassed 365. Cambridge, in a minority of 205, followed on,
-and put their opponents in for 186, which were knocked off with five
-wickets to spare.
-
-New men coming into the teams about this time were not less excellent
-than their predecessors. Cambridge in 1893, in his third year, tried
-K. S. Ranjitsinhji, who was third in the averages, his chief scores
-being 40, 55, 38, 58, and 40. Mr. J. Douglas, a capital bat, with
-a delightful way of scoring neatly off all bowling alike, used in
-those days to bowl slows which obtained a fair number of wickets.
-Mr. A. O. Jones, carefully coached by Arthur Shrewsbury, of course
-showed barely a glimpse of the great powers he subsequently displayed
-for Notts. Mr. L. H. Gay was a wicket-keeper altogether above the
-average, who had singular ill-luck in finding so many of his terms at
-Cambridge tally with those of Mr. MacGregor. He was a lively hitter,
-whose wicket was uncommonly hard to obtain. One graceful bat remains
-to be mentioned, Mr. P. H. Latham, who, good as he was, ought to have
-been still better, and would have been if he could have resisted the
-temptation to lash out at an insidious slow. Treading on the heels of
-these came another remarkable group of bats. The brilliancy of Mr. N.
-F. Druce has hardly been excelled. His batting was once described as
-“the champagne of cricket,” and certainly the epithet is deserved.
-Practically his connection with the game ceased after his residence
-at Trinity Hall, except for one tour in Australia; so it is the more
-necessary to emphasise how very fine, as well as captivating, was his
-method of run-getting. It may be added that he has the highest average
-of any Cantab, namely, 52.47 for an aggregate of 2414, and _v._ Mr.
-C. I. Thornton’s eleven amassed 227 not out, the highest score ever
-made at Cambridge, the opposing bowlers including Mr. F. S. Jackson,
-Hirst, Woodcock, and Hearne. Mr. W. G. Druce never attained the same
-standard as his more famous brother, but he was a valuable run-getter
-and also a most useful wicket-keeper. Mr. F. Mitchell, despite a
-remarkable start, did not in his University cricket display the form
-which culminated in his great batting of 1901. Mr. T. N. Perkins was
-a notably punishing bat, but the great Cambridge weakness lay in
-the miserable quality of the attack. Oxford in this respect was not
-much stronger, though Mr. G. F. H. Berkeley in his day was above the
-average. At this period, which coincides with that when one of the
-present writers heartily enjoyed his own University career, there were
-some distinguished bats to be added to those noticed above. Prominent,
-of course, was Mr. C. B. Fry, in those days a much slower run-getter
-than when he amassed those six consecutive centuries for Sussex. Mr.
-R. C. N. Palairet was often a formidable scorer, and when he and his
-brother went in first for Oxford _v._ Cambridge in 1893, it was for
-the first time since 1878 that two brothers had done so for the senior
-University; it had then been the two Webbes. Cambridge furnishes only
-one such incident, the case of Messrs. G. B. and J. E. K. Studd in
-1882. Mr. G. J. Mordaunt was a capital bat and an absolutely beautiful
-field in the country, the amount of ground he covered and his rapidity
-in returning the ball being quite extraordinary. To these must be added
-that attractive bat, Mr. H. K. Foster, with his graceful strokes, some
-of them learnt in the racquet-court. At least one prominent judge
-maintains that his forlorn effort of 121 on fourth hands in 1895 was
-the superb gem of the whole series of big University scores since
-1878. His efforts for Worcestershire have shown how little of a lucky
-accident was this brilliant achievement. Few sounder bats ever appeared
-than Mr. P. F. Warner, and if more prolonged praise be not added, it
-is only because the warm friendship and admiration of the two writers
-regard it as superfluous. His scores have been made in many climes, but
-the best of them all have been compiled at headquarters.
-
-In 1901, one of the present scribes contributed to an article written
-for the _Badminton Magazine_ by the other the following account of the
-close finish of the University match of 1896, and it is felt that no
-more sincere record could now be penned; hence its partial quotation is
-perhaps pardonable:—
-
-“The last choice, not made until the morning of the match, lay between
-G. B. Raikes and G. O. Smith. Now as the attack was rather tender
-(P. S. Waddy was the only real ‘change’ to F. H. E. Cunliffe and J.
-C. Hartley), it was universally thought that the former as a bowler
-should have the preference (he had played in the two previous years);
-but he was bowling none too well at the time, and eventually the
-decision was in favour of strengthening the batting. As events proved,
-this selection settled the match. Cambridge batted first, Burnup and
-Wilson making a long stand; Bray hit confidently at the finish. I
-think, however, it speaks well for Oxonian fielding, that on a fast
-true wicket, against only four bowlers (C. C. Pilkington also went
-on), it took six hours to amass 319, Mordaunt’s work in the country
-being especially fine. We did none too well in the first innings, and
-owing to the no-ball incident we saved following on. This incident, to
-my mind, was an error of judgment. The Cambridge eleven had not had a
-long outing, the discrepancy of 120 is a lot in a ‘Varsity match, and
-to follow on between five and seven is not to enjoy the best of the
-day’s light at Lord’s. At the same time, the reception Cambridge had
-at the hands of the members of M.C.C. was unpardonable, and certainly
-prejudiced their play in the second attempt. Whilst saying so, I am
-not detracting from Cunliffe’s performance, who, for the first hour,
-bowled better than he ever had before. Norman Druce, the best bat on
-either side, stemmed disaster. So with two wickets in hand Cambridge
-on the second evening led by 217, and directly play ceased rain fell
-heavily. However, that rain proved our godsend, for a light roller on
-it, binding the wicket together, made it better than at any previous
-time in the match, which was saying a good deal. Eventually Oxford
-was left with 330 to win, and up to that time the highest total ever
-recorded on fourth hands in the University contest was 176. A bad
-start was made, for at luncheon three good wickets were down for 81,
-Mordaunt, Foster, and Warner being disposed of, the latter having
-the unique experience of being twice run out in a University match.
-With Pilkington and G. O. Smith together, it dawned on the Oxonian
-supporters that, after all, victory was not out of the question. From
-this time, helped by a few errors in the field, we never looked back.
-I had an enjoyable partnership with the hero of the game, and before
-I was caught at the wicket, a possible victory was in sight, for the
-sting had gone out, to a great extent, of the Cambridge attack (G. L.
-Jessop, C. E. M. Wilson, E. B. Shine, and P. W. Cobbold). Bardswell
-followed me, full of confidence, and hit with bland imperturbability,
-scoring the winning stroke, being missed off it, by the way, by Burnup.
-Of G. O. Smith’s innings of 132 it is impossible to speak too highly,
-and he thoroughly deserved his memorable ovation, the whole pavilion
-rising and cheering him. All said and done, looking back, apart from
-unbounded admiration for his prowess, the great factor of Oxford’s
-success was undoubtedly the fielding. We had precious little bowling,
-and conventional fielding would have given us no chance. The game was
-won by the work of the eleven in combination, and if only the fielding
-in first-class matches were what it should be, drawn games would be
-very rare. Reform the fielding, and then the laws of the game will need
-but little reformation.”
-
-By this time it will have been noticed that the Light Blues had been
-reinforced by that prince of hard hitters, Mr. G. L. Jessop, who was a
-tearaway bowler to boot, and that admirable batsman, Mr. C. J. Burnup,
-the new Kent captain. The succession of clever Cambridge wicket-keepers
-was kept up by Mr. E. H. Bray, than whom no one ever kept his hands
-closer to the sticks. After this, for the next few years University
-cricket undoubtedly fell a little flat. It was overshadowed to an
-unfortunate extent by the more absorbing interest evinced in county
-cricket. There were excellent cricketers on each side, but the teams
-were not so cohesive as that of 1896, had not the same proportion
-of really prominent amateurs as heretofore, and—here is the chief
-point—the idea had become prevalent that the keenness of the game was
-relaxed in the trial matches. So thoroughly was this re-established in
-1902, so keen was the big match that year, and so bright the prospects
-of the game in the immediate future at both Universities, that it is
-permissible to frankly state so much, and to regard the years between
-1896 and 1902 as ebb years, in comparison to the onward flow from 1889
-to 1896.
-
-But there was one gorgeous piece of cricket performed by the greatest
-of recent undergraduates. Mr. R. E. Foster, the one batsman since Mr.
-Norman Druce equally perfect to watch, played in 1900 a score of 171,
-a new record in the match, the previous best contribution having been
-Mr. Key’s 143 in 1886. An eye-witness wrote in that cricketer’s Bible,
-_Wisden_: “The innings was not only a great one in a numerical sense,
-but was in every way a magnificent display of batting. He only took
-three hours and ten minutes to get his runs, and, so far as anyone
-noticed, he did not give a single chance. Apart from the fact that he
-once failed to bring off a more than usually daring pull, and that just
-before he was out he made a dangerous stroke beyond mid-off, we did
-not see any fault in his play. As a matter of record, it may be added
-that he hit twenty-four fours, three threes, and thirteen twos. Hitting
-more superb than his can scarcely have been seen since Yardley played
-his great innings of 130 in 1872. He was equally strong all round the
-wicket, driving magnificently on the off side, pulling with the utmost
-certainty, and making any number of late cuts that were as safe as they
-were effective.” It will be remembered that ten days later he followed
-this up by scoring two separate hundreds for Gentlemen _v._ Players at
-Lord’s, a feat never performed in this match by any other cricketer
-appearing for either denomination. His average for Oxford was 77 for an
-aggregate of 930, and he led his team through a victorious season, as
-five matches were won, none lost, and four drawn.
-
-Of other undergraduates, Mr. B. J. T. Bosanquet worked hard, getting
-a good many wickets and scoring with reliable consistency. A superb
-wicket-keeper was produced in Mr. H. Martyn, for with a style that was
-a model of neatness, he was particularly strong on the leg side, as
-well as a forcing bat. Not nearly enough credit was given to Mr. C. H.
-B. Marsham for his exceptionally meritorious century on fourth hands,
-and in disadvantageous circumstances, in the University match of 1901.
-It was not until a year later that he came to be generally recognised
-as a batsman of judicious temperament, possessing a very pretty knack
-of placing the ball hard on the off side. On contemporary Oxford it
-would be unfair to pass judgment, but it is at least permissible to
-express the belief that Mr. W. H. B. Evans (nephew of the once-renowned
-bowler) will fulfil our high expectation, and that Mr. W. Findlay is
-one of the best custodians of the sticks to be found in current cricket.
-
-Turning to Cambridge, the brothers Wilson have emulated the feat of the
-brothers Foster at Oxford, and each scored a century in the University
-match. The elder, Mr. C. E. M. Wilson, in his four University matches
-scored 351, with an average of nearly 44, and took twelve wickets at
-a cost of 21 runs apiece. The younger, Mr. E. R. Wilson, in a similar
-series of fixtures, averaged 42, with an aggregate of 296, and captured
-nineteen wickets for less than 22 runs each. These meritorious figures
-were achieved by steady cricket, which never pandered to a gallery,
-never took a risk, nor for one moment became really brilliant. For
-comparison, it may be added that Mr. R. E. Foster averaged 48 for a
-total of 342. Of the other Cantabs, Mr. T. L. Taylor, of course, has
-been the soundest and greatest bat. Indeed, on a wet wicket he has
-rarely had a superior. Mr. S. H. Day has proved himself to be amongst
-the best of young cricketers, and Mr. E. M. Dowson with bat and ball
-has done yeoman service. As a singularity, it may be mentioned that in
-1902 Mr. E. F. Penn reappeared in the eleven, after being two years
-absent at the war.
-
-To mention the legion who have passed from their University eleven into
-that of the Gentlemen would take up too much space, but it may be of
-interest to give a list of those who have represented England in the
-test matches at home:—
-
- OXFORD CAMBRIDGE
-
- Lord Harris (Eton). A. P. Lucas (Uppingham).
- Sir T. C. O’Brien. A. G. Steel (Marlborough).
- E. F. S. Tylecote (Clifton). A. Lyttelton (Eton).
- C. B. Fry (Repton). C. T. Studd (Eton).
- L. C. H. Palairet (Repton). G. E. MacGregor (Uppingham).
- F. S. Jackson (Harrow).
- K. S. Ranjitsinhji.
- G. L. Jessop.
- A. O. Jones (Bedford).
-
- Batting—25 inn., 404 runs, 69 inn., 2316 runs, 33.39
- 16.4 average. average.
-
- Bowling—18 runs, 0 wicket. 1265 runs, 36 wickets, 35.5
- average.
-
-And further, one of the writers, who is in the habit of perpetrating
-statistics, has made out that against Australians in this country, in
-eleven-a-side matches, Oxonians (past and present) have scored 10,439
-runs in 527 completed innings, averaging 19.426 per innings; and
-Cantabs (past and present) have scored 17,834 runs in 924 completed
-innings, averaging 19.276 per innings. The Oxford bowlers have claimed
-270 Colonial wickets at a cost of 6202 runs, thus costing 22.282 runs
-apiece; but the Cambridge bowlers, though they captured 392 wickets,
-did so at an expense of 43.36 runs apiece, the aggregate being 16,892.
-
-Passing from figures to matches, it may be as well to sketch the
-programme of each University season. Directly term commences, usually
-in April, when the weather is miserably cold and wet, and no one
-has had any practice, comes the Seniors’ match. As the object of the
-executive is to find new bowlers, it is obvious that the bowlers in
-this game are none of the best, even judged by the low standard of
-amateur attack. There is, as a rule, a large amount of heavy scoring,
-but the fielding is slack, and the fixture is invested with little
-real keenness. Far more enthusiasm is aroused by the Freshmen’s match.
-Here is the pick of the public schools of the year before, with a
-stray candidate from a colony or a private tutor’s. The cricket is
-not co-operative, for each is trying to make a good impression “on
-his own.” In the heat of modern competition, it is particularly
-difficult for a batsman to obtain his blue as a freshman. With bowling
-it is different, but the captain is prone to wait till the promising
-undergraduate has acquired some experience in county cricket. Other
-trial games are XII. _v._ Next XVI., the XI. _v._ XVI. Freshmen,
-“Perambulators” _v._ “Etceteras.” The “Perambulators” are composed
-of those who come from Eton, Winchester, Harrow, and Rugby, whilst
-“Etceteras” are selected from those from other schools. Then come the
-University fixtures. The opening is against a Gentlemen of England
-team, of which one of the present writers has latterly had charge—a
-very pleasant game for all concerned, and one provocative of no little
-curiosity to see how the new men shape. As a rule a couple of counties,
-M.C.C., and latterly Dr. Grace’s club, with the Australians, if on
-tour, form the rest of the home fixtures. Thus far the University
-captain has probably been varying his side a good deal, and has had one
-or two extra places available for trials, because blues may be in the
-schools. But by the time the out matches begin, if the eleven be not
-pretty well together, matters cannot be altogether favourable. Good
-cricket at the Oval and heavy scoring at Brighton are the preludes
-to the final trial _v._ M.C.C. at Lord’s. Half the Oxford eleven now
-never play in this latter engagement, and it must be said that there
-is some reason for this, for whereas Cambridge get a clear three days’
-rest before the ‘Varsity match at the Oval, Oxford sometimes only
-get one day. The final place is often a matter of the most dubious
-difficulty. There are often two men whose merits are almost equal, and
-the decision, if wrong, may ultimately ruin the big match.
-
-What a game it is, Oxford _v._ Cambridge, unrivalled for its sporting
-keenness, and if it has proved a triumph to many, it has also been
-a game of cruel disappointment in those who have been expected to
-do best. The importance of the match to the funds of M.C.C. can be
-gathered from the annual balance-sheet of the club, and considering
-the difficulty of affording sufficient money for professionals and
-other expenses at the Universities, it may be open to the consideration
-of the committee if it would not be judicious were the premier club
-to increase the amount of the annual donation to the rival centres
-of education, whose delegates provide such an immense share of the
-club revenue. If the University match were to be removed from
-Lord’s—_absit omen_—it is obvious that the club in St. John’s Wood
-would suffer far more than either Oxford or Cambridge. Such an exodus
-is not probable, but the old order changes, and it would be wise as
-well as generous if the committee could give more lavishly where it
-receives so bountifully.
-
-A survey of all the University matches seems to authorise two
-deductions: Firstly, that, all else being equal, it is better to
-choose for places in University teams men who have already played
-before a crowd, because nervousness is so apt to overtake the novice
-when participating in this fixture. Secondly, that the presence of a
-formidable fast bowler is the best agency for victory. Matches, as a
-rule, have gone to the team which backed up a destructive attack with
-competent fielding, and there seems no reason why in this respect
-history should not repeat itself. We may be permitted to conclude with
-an expression of the sincere hope that University cricket may maintain
-its high position, and that the big match will remain something in
-which all the Empire shall continue to take legitimate pride and
-interest, because it is the contest between the best of England’s youth
-fought in true sporting fashion.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER XI
-
-COUNTRY-HOUSE CRICKET
-
-By H. D. G. LEVESON-GOWER
-
-
-I have not the least idea where my genial editor is going to put the
-present chapter in this book, but I am willing to wager that it will
-prove the lightest and most frivolous in his team. In the literary
-menu I sincerely hope some one will find it the savoury of the meal,
-because personally I like savouries best, and naturally I prefer my
-own chapter to any other—parenthetically, I have not seen any of the
-rest, except the one which I had a share in writing. No one has perhaps
-played more country-house cricket than I have, and certainly no one has
-derived more enjoyment from the matches. So I can write with agreeable
-memories. But as the games are the least formal in the whole range of
-cricket, therefore I feel this chapter needs no apology for being a
-trifle desultory. We are now taking our ease after dinner, and chatting
-in quite a happy-go-lucky way.
-
-“What good times I have had in country-house cricket, to be sure,”
-ought to be the observation of any one who has had much to do with such
-games. If not, there has been something wrong with the individual. So
-he is not you, gentle reader, and, if that is the test, most certainly
-he is not me.
-
-All the same, I have not enjoyed the prime of country-house cricket.
-That must be a tradition among my seniors. Don’t you know the type of
-jolly old buffer, aged anything between fifty-five and seventy, with a
-big voice, bigger presence, and cheery disposition, when the gout does
-not give him a twinge, who lights a cigar, pulls down his shirt-cuffs,
-and has a twinkle in his eye at the very mention of country-house
-cricket?
-
-Men of this type made country-house cricket a thing of gorgeous
-merriment. Possibly at college they had paid more attention to May Week
-than to Plato, and to Eights Week than to Smalls. But they played for
-their runs in life as keenly as they tried to make them at cricket,
-and if they are not on the roll of fame, their names are in letters
-of gold on the list of English gentlemen. And mark you, it’s no light
-thing to be a real English gentleman. A goodly number of those who call
-themselves such don’t behave as such, perhaps have no conception of the
-true decencies of that most honourable walk in life. But that’s another
-story, and my theme is cricket.
-
-Moreover, I am not an old buffer, and I am going to have my say in this
-chapter. So having patted the elder generation admiringly on the back,
-I shall confine myself to my own.
-
-Therefore I am compelled to repeat that, as far as I can judge, the
-palmy days of country-house cricket were before my time. I have had a
-rattling good experience myself, but each year I see some perceptible
-shortening in of the amount of this class of cricket. Not that there
-is not enough for anybody, in all conscience, so long as he is in the
-swim. But it is more difficult to get just the right men to play, and
-just the right places to play at. No one who ever met me would bring up
-any charge of pessimism. I am merely stating a fact for the benefit,
-say, of school-boys of to-day, who may not be able to get quite such a
-golden time in just the same way as I and scores of my contemporaries.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Picture by_ _John Collet._
-_MISS WICKET AND MISS TRIGGER._
- “Miss Trigger you see is an excellent shot.
- And Forty-five Notches Miss Wicket’s just got.”
-]
-
-The multiplication of clubs has not only spoilt to some extent the
-fixtures of the elder clubs, but also prevents the younger ones
-from getting exactly the matches they want. The next detrimental is
-the multiplicity of first-class fixtures. In 1881 there were about
-eighty such matches. Last year 154 matches were played in the county
-competition, and there were quite seventy others which had claims
-upon the compilers of statistics. The ratio of time available for a
-genuine amateur good enough to play in matches of this standard to
-snatch for the relaxation of an off-day country match therefore differs
-perceptibly. Moreover, there is an even worse obstacle, and it is that,
-nowadays, gentlemen take up professions much earlier. Men who are
-going to practice at the Bar can no longer afford to be idle during
-several summers after they have come down from the University. If they
-are going into business, into the City or on the Stock Exchange, it
-is, to-day, at the earliest possible date, not at the latest. Truly
-the old order changes, for formerly where a young man might laugh and
-disport himself in the days of his youth, now he must work to earn a
-living wage in the struggle for life. Fourthly, there is the insidious
-beguiling of golf, which attracts many a man from Saturday cricket. All
-these changes are marked on the sheet which records the difficulties of
-country-house cricket.
-
-Going one step further, look at the Herculean task of collecting a
-team. You must offer good enough matches to get the aid of really good
-cricketers; and even then the bulk are off on tours. A mere village
-match, be it ever so cheery and enjoyable, will not induce a man to
-travel a long distance, to come to a strange place, where he knows no
-one but his skipper. It is not human nature in the twentieth century,
-and nowhere does human nature come out more plainly than at cricket.
-Show me the spirit in which a man plays a cricket week, and I will tell
-you his character; it is often easier to gauge than his true form,
-which may be affected by ill-health or adverse weather, or even genuine
-bad luck. A great deal too much is heard about luck in cricket. I do
-not say it does not exist. For example, I would say Haigh had shocking
-luck in not being chosen in a test match in 1902, and that Mr. J. H.
-Brain had a real spell of bad luck when he scored 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 2 in
-Oxford _v._ Cambridge and the two Gentlemen _v._ Players matches of
-1885, when at the very top of his form. But for the most part “luck” is
-made the excuse for other things at cricket.
-
-Let me sketch an ideal week of country-house cricket, such as I have
-myself experienced several times. People are asked to stay in the house
-who are all previously acquainted with one another, thereby removing
-any stiffness and undue formality. There have been cases where, from
-almost undue kindness, host and hostess have had a house full of
-cricketers, many of whom they do not personally know, and the guests
-themselves, however much they enjoy themselves, must be conscious of
-the feeling that they are practically staying in a hotel, so little do
-they really come in touch with their hospitable entertainers. I do like
-a hostess to act as mother to the team, and for the old sportsman who
-entertains us to stand umpire. A bevy of nice girls are needed to keep
-us all civilised, and the merriment is then tremendous. Perhaps if a
-match is over early there is a ladies’ cricket match. Anyhow, there is
-a dance one night. On the others, songs, games, practical jokes, any
-amount of happy, innocent nonsense, as well as perchance a flirtation
-as hot as it is hopeless. Boy and girl alike know they may never meet
-again, but they won’t waste time meanwhile. Another of the charms of
-country-house weeks, if you are invited to the same one regularly,
-is that year by year you meet a group of very nice people you never
-perhaps see at any other time, but who inspire you with sincere regard.
-“Don’t you remember?” and “How’s so-and-so?” enable you in five minutes
-to pick up the old threads.
-
-These form the background. The cricket itself ought to be of sufficient
-importance to interest everybody, but not be allowed to degenerate into
-an infatuation, and therefore a nuisance to the fair sex. The ground
-ought not to be too good, for a perfect pitch takes the heart out of
-the bowling, and long scoring can be over-indulged in. All the four
-totals over 100 and under 200 was A. G. Steel’s ideal game, and it is
-about the best. The games should have local interest, and should if
-possible bring over one or two cricketers known to the house party.
-As for the cricket lunches, most delightful of all Benedick meals, on
-no account let hospitality spoil them. Champagne lunches are being
-horribly overdone. Men do not play good cricket on Perrier Jouet,
-followed by _creme de menthe_, with two big cigars topping a rich
-and succulent menu. No, give us some big pies, cold chickens, a fine
-sirloin of English beef, and a round of brawn, washed down by good ale
-and luscious shandygaff. That is all that cricketers want, and kings
-only fare worse. If the county folk drive over in the afternoon the
-host is afforded an opportunity of providing an enjoyable diversion
-for his neighbours. It is quite true that lots of men, unless they
-know that they will be extremely well done, infinitely prefer to be
-put up at a hotel in the nearest town. But that is partially because
-of their bachelor shyness, and partially because they fear they will
-be too hampered both in the matter of taking their ease and also about
-tobacco. Formerly it was the exception to smoke, now the exception is
-not to. I remember when Smokers _v._ Non-Smokers was played at Lord’s.
-The former eleven all took the field with cigarettes in their mouths,
-and freely declared that some of their opponents had not been lifelong
-total abstainers in the matter of tobacco. It was a rattling good game,
-all the same. Those big amateur matches at Lord’s had something of the
-charm of country-house cricket on a large scale, thanks to a slight
-relaxation of formality and a good deal of cheery hitting. The best
-of these functions was the I Zingari jubilee match, when the famous
-wanderers opposed the Gentlemen of England in 1895.
-
-In connection with the immortal gipsy club, it is interesting to quote
-its motto, “Keep your promise—keep your temper—keep your wicket up.”
-Founded in 1835 under the title of the Beverley Club, it was renamed
-by Sir Spencer Ponsonby Fane, who with the late Mr. Lorraine Baldwin
-and my own uncle, Mr. Chandos Leigh, will be for ever associated with
-its welfare. The rules are unique, and a trifle whimsical; for example:
-“Entrance be nothing, and the annual subscription do not exceed the
-entrance.” At the election of a new member, it was enjoined that the
-candidate should take his stand at the wicket with or without a bat,
-as the committee may decide. Being a vagrant body, the I Zingari have
-never boasted a ground of their own, and it is a pity that more serious
-cricket should have lessened the importance of their chief matches.
-
-Now, having announced that I am going to be desultory, I propose to
-reel off a batch of anecdotes. The bulk will be anonymous, which is a
-pity, because individuality always gives point to a tale, but I have no
-wish to hurt any one’s feelings.
-
-Some years ago, at the period known as “when we were boys together,”
-the late Lord Leconfield one summer holidays had a boys’ cricket week
-at Petworth, having teams of Sussex, Surrey, and Hampshire youngsters
-to play. He daily entertained all the teams at dinner, which, by the
-way, was served on silver plates. Suddenly, in one of those silences
-which sometimes fall on assembled eaters, a big lad shouted, loud
-enough to be heard even by the late Lord Leconfield himself, “I do
-hate eating off these beastly tin plates; in a decent house like this
-they might give us china ones.” This lad never proved good enough
-for first-class cricket, so please do not father the tale on to any
-prominent run-getter.
-
-A certain amateur of a team staying in a country house, who was a
-bit of a wag, by the way, much annoyed the rather pompous host by
-addressing the family butler as “waiter.” The skipper of the team
-remonstrated, but with no result. At breakfast the cricketer in
-question never seemed able to get the right dish; if he meant eggs, he
-received kidneys, and so forth. This was because, the menu being in
-French, he used to point at random to some item, not wishing to betray
-his ignorance of the language. On the last morning of the week, when
-the usual bill of fare was brought to him, he retorted in stentorian
-accents, “Rats to you, waiter; I’ll fetch it for myself.”
-
-I have had so many happy years of comradeship with “Plum” Warner that
-he must forgive me if I spin a yarn or two about him. I was in the
-habit of taking an eleven each year against Mr. Charles Goschen’s team,
-an ideal country-house cricket match. To my dismay, for I was always
-anxious to win, we were once decidedly weak in bowling, and we knew
-Warner was playing for Mr. Charles Goschen’s eleven. So after grave
-consultation we decided that, as we were never likely to bowl him out
-by fair means, we would do it by foul. We pressed on him to accept an
-invitation to stay overnight before the match. Now, my old friend is
-most abstemious, but on this occasion the far-famed claret of our
-host, dexterously administered by the opposing team, had considerable
-effect. He was earnestly solicited to give his opinion on every vintage
-we could find, and the spoon might have stood up in the whiskey dashed
-with soda which was mixed for his nightcap. On the morrow, when he was
-out before he ran into double figures, we decided that Bacchus was the
-best bowler on our side.
-
-The next story is not a country-house cricket story at all, but as it
-is new in print, it may be allowed to slip in. It happened when I was
-captain of Oxford, and I think the match was against the Australians.
-Those who merely study cricket scores may not be aware that Warner has
-a high opinion of his own persuasiveness as a change bowler. His actual
-figures for life up to 1902, in first-class cricket, drawn from Mr.
-Home Gordon’s _Cricket Form at a Glance_, are only three wickets for
-196 runs, which only shows how bad is the judgment of modern captains.
-If he had been permitted the persistency of K. S. Ranjitsinhji, he
-would probably have captured more wickets. Last season, when he was
-captain, he failed to disturb the bails to the tune of 51 runs, which
-proves his modesty. I have known captains go on to bowl first and stay
-on through the whole innings, but of such certainly is not my old
-friend. However, in the match in question, when our opponents wanted
-about six runs to win, and I don’t know how many wickets to fall,
-I chucked the ball to “Plum.” “Ridley and Cobden won’t be in it,”
-observed one of the fieldsmen, and in memorial was written this rhyme:—
-
- Little Plum Warner stood in a corner,
- Thinking he’d like to bowl.
- The captain said, “Hum,
- I _will_ put on Plum,
- He may get me out of this hole.”
-
-But sad to relate, he did not.
-
-Captain Trevor, the popular “Dux,” used to tell a cheery story about
-the demoralising effect of first-class cricket. Mr. A. S. Archer had
-been a big scorer for the Incogs; then he went with Lord Hawke’s team
-to the Cape, and on his return had changed his style, and could score
-no more. Captain Trevor plucked up courage enough to suggest he should
-forget that he had ever “figured in averages,” and should play in the
-old way.
-
-“You want the golf shot?”
-
-“If you please.”
-
-“And the tennis scoop towards third man?”
-
-“Certainly.”
-
-“And a pull?”
-
-“Three in each over.”
-
-“Right.”
-
-He went to the wicket and made ninety without a chance that was
-accepted.
-
-[Illustration: _A COUNTRY HOUSE CRICKET MATCH._]
-
-Any one who has much to do with getting up matches can tell eloquent
-tales about being chucked. Perhaps nobody quite appreciates the force
-of the parable in which they all with one accord began to make excuse,
-until he is running a cricket week. This telegram was positively sent
-by the man on whom everything depended, “Can’t come; am summoned on a
-jury.” The wretched captain retorted, “Rot, you are not a householder,”
-but he had to fill the vacancy. Not long ago Mr. A. D. Whatman, wrote
-begging forgiveness, but the fact was, he was off fishing. As for the
-accident which keeps a man who is passing through town “laid up and
-unable to come on,” it is nearly as ancient and as annoying to the
-manager as that hoary chestnut, “prevented by an illness in my family.”
-However, these things will occur in the best-arranged teams.
-
-There is a comfort and ease about country-house and minor cricket,
-which you do not get in the charmed circle of first-class matches. The
-good-humoured chaff is most healthy, and certainly tends to prevent
-mannerisms, into which many engaged in prominent cricket find they are
-apt to drop. Also the search-light of publicity is conspicuous by its
-absence.
-
-Next, I would like to quote a story which my old friend Mr. C. W.
-Alcock relates, and which, I fancy, he personally overheard on a
-tram: “No, Bill didn’t get much out of his day’s cricket. He had to
-pay eight bob for his railway fare, and lost ‘is day’s screw, and was
-fined a shilling for being late next morning, and ‘e didn’t get no
-wickets, and ‘e missed four ketches, and ‘e got a couple of beautiful
-blobs. He did feel sold, he did.” If anybody observes that is what
-can be euphemistically described as a chestnut, my retort is, that
-it will be new to a great many people. Certainly we all thought the
-story of Mr. “Buns” Thornton making a mighty slog, and Mr. Bonnor
-subsequently observing that he had a sister who could hit as hard,
-was a hoary veteran. You will remember Mr. Thornton’s reply: “Why not
-bring her over and marry her to Louis Hall? You could then combine the
-two styles.” That was said at Scarborough, but this very story in the
-cricket week of 1901 in that very town was hailed as a diverting and
-fresh anecdote. Wherefore I take courage to proceed in my own garrulous
-fashion.
-
-Among the pleasantest of all country matches are the military weeks.
-The play is brisk, hard hitting, keen fielding, usually a Tommy who
-sends down expresses which it is a treat to cut to the boundary, and,
-of course, the most unbounded hospitality and good-fellowship. Then
-there is always the regimental band in the afternoon, and one can do
-a little dance step to beguile the tedium of fielding, or should you
-be dismissed for one of those conspicuous oval blobs, it is at least
-consoling to retire to a tune from the last musical comedy. And of
-course, at soldier fixtures, all the ladies of the garrison muster in
-their brightest frocks, and I can truthfully say that a match where
-none of the fair sex are spectators loses one ray of sunshine for me.
-The follies of girls who do not understand the game may sound funny
-set down in printer’s ink, but spoken by merry lips, they only provoke
-laughter, while, as a matter of fact, lots of ladies understand cricket
-quite as well as most of men do; moreover, they are singularly quick
-at noticing idiosyncrasies in the players.
-
-School tours are splendid things at the beginning of the holidays.
-Eton Ramblers, Harrow Wanderers, Marlborough Blues, Old Malvernians,
-Uppingham Rovers, Old Cliftonians, and last, but chief in my eyes,
-Old Wykehamists—the very names cause a glow at our hearts. There you
-get boys leaving school playing side by side with a schoolmaster or
-two as comrades, and no longer _in statu pupillari_. The former gain
-confidence, the latter rub off the corners which may have become rather
-sharp during the half, and both are leavened by a further batch of old
-boys who have names still respected at the school. The cricket is keen,
-and the talk over the pipes after dinner is clean, healthy, and tends
-to put them all on good terms with one another.
-
-I purposed to have written quite a valuable treatise on clubs, but
-when I dipped into the books, I either found that the serious matters
-would be dry-as-dust at this stage of my article, or else that it
-was difficult to collect information. So I shall merely emphasise
-the cordiality of the sides which do battle each summer. I Zingari
-come first to my thoughts, for not only have I the honour to wear
-the red, yellow, and black, but my uncle, Mr. Chandos Leigh, is one
-of the presiding potentates—more power to him. No longer do these
-wanderers figure on the card of the Canterbury Week, but it is still
-their festival. Theirs is the big tent, theirs the admirable theatrical
-performances, and theirs the true traditions of the historic Week.
-It is the most delightful function in county cricket to-day, just as
-it was formerly the greatest boon in old-time cricket. I feel that
-some of the graceful irresponsible matches which were contested at
-Prince’s in the ‘seventies still cast a pleasant reflection on the Week
-at the old minster town. Also, I heartily wish I Zingari could revive
-that one-time match _v._ Gentlemen of England at Scarborough, but the
-difficulty of collecting competent sides seems insurmountable. But
-let no one think I Zingari do not keep up their pristine value. Have
-they ever had a finer record than in 1902? It reads: matches played,
-29; matches lost, 1, Silwood Park winning a one-day game by 46 runs.
-So I think the spirit of I Zingari can look very beaming when she is
-pleasantly embodied for the epilogue of the Kent festival.
-
-It is impossible to run over the list of clubs. Free Foresters, of
-course, recurs to memory—cheery, bright, with a military leaven, under
-the admirable guardianship of Mr. E. Rutter. Their annual volume yields
-an admirable statement of bustling, hard-fought cricket on many welcome
-swards where reporters do not scribble nor the public give heed.
-Amateur cricket owes a great debt to them, and also to the Incogniti,
-in which the present governor of Jamaica has taken such keen interest.
-With varying sides, but unvarying good-fellowship, these pilgrims of
-cricket show how many withstand the attractions of golf, and prefer to
-drive the leather rather than the Haskell.
-
-Each University has one club noteworthy to the community at large.
-Cambridge boasts the Quidnuncs, the cap of which is so familiar in
-county matches, because hardly any old blue seems to wear his ‘Varsity
-colours. Against Yorkshire at Lord’s in August 1902, four of the
-Middlesex side wore those colours of dark blue with the narrow blue
-stripe, these being Messrs. Cyril Foley, C. M. Wells, R. N. and J.
-Douglas. Though it is limited to fifteen members in residence at
-Cambridge, practically everybody who is tried for the eleven appears to
-outsiders to be entitled to wear the caps, though no undergraduate in
-his first year is eligible.
-
-Of the Harlequins I must write more briefly than I should like. They
-are very dear to me, and I had the honour in 1902 of being elected
-Vice-President in succession to Mr. A. J. Webbe, who became President
-in consequence of the death of Mr. C. J. B. Marsham, who had occupied
-the position since the foundation of the club in 1845. One annual
-meeting is held each year on the first day of the match with the
-Gentlemen of England, when the elections take place. Only seventeen
-members may be in residence, and no one can be put up as a candidate
-until his fourth term. There is always one pleasant function, the
-dinner given by that keenest supporter, Mr. T. B. Case. If the
-Harlequins do not play so many matches as of yore, it must not be
-ascribed to lack of enthusiasm, but to the more lengthy programme
-of the Authentics, who possess a wider range of selection. The
-Harlequin cap, in its bold contrast, has been seen on every ground,
-and at Lord’s, to the end of their keen careers in the field, it was
-invariably worn by two very fine Oxonian cricketers who never obtained
-their colours, Messrs. T. S. Pearson and J. Robertson-Walker. Of yore,
-half the Oxford eleven used to be seen arrayed in the coloured shirt of
-the Harlequins, which was gaudy when new and looked shabby when it had
-been for a short period the sport of the elements. I am not speaking by
-book, but my impression is that Mr. “Punch” Phillipson and Mr. J. H.
-Brain would be the two last who have donned the garment in first-class
-cricket. Long life and unabating good fellowship to Harlequins, present
-and future! There is every sign that the wish is destined to be
-fulfilled.
-
-The Authentics Cricket Club was founded by Everard Britten-Holmes, in
-November 1883, who, from its birth in Brazenose College, Oxford, has
-acted as its Hon. Secretary to the present day (1903), G. R. Askwith of
-B.N.C. being its first Hon. Treasurer, then followed by H. Acland-Hood
-of Balliol (1884-89). During the summer of 1884, arrangements were made
-to tour during the summer vacation, and what was at first but a week’s
-cricket, has become one of several months, and a membership then of 19
-has become one of nearly 800.
-
-During the winter of 1885, it was decided to place the club upon a more
-solid and active basis, and a large gathering of prominent ‘Varsity
-players and others was held at Oxford, a question at that time coming
-up, as a suggestion, to include Cambridge ‘Varsity players and others,
-when it was unanimously resolved and carried, that the club be called
-“The Oxford University Authentics,” and confined to members of Oxford
-University only. Special rules were drawn up for membership, etc.,
-and many matters of detail arranged. More important matches were
-played during the summer vacation, with a view of unearthing latent
-cricket talent, and giving members an opportunity of being brought
-more prominently before the cricket authorities at Oxford, and their
-respective counties—an opportunity they could not otherwise then have
-had. Above all, it had in view the keeping of old ‘Varsity cricketers
-of the past in touch with the present, and the present in touch with
-the future. Professor Case of Corpus Christi College—the well-known
-old Oxford cricket blue of 1864, 1865, and 1867—readily consented to
-become the President, and took much interest in the club, and to him we
-owe its motto: “By Jove’s authentic fire.” It may be mentioned that the
-name “Authentics” was given to the club by the founder, who, being a
-musical enthusiast, coined the word “Authentics,” as from an authentic
-cadence in music, and as derived from the Greek [Greek: authenteô], “to
-rule”; and from Professor Case’s happy thought the colours of the club
-were suggested—“Blue” for the sky, “Blood Red” for Jove’s arm, and
-“Old Gold” for the lightning.
-
-Reverting to country-house cricket—aye, and the observation does for
-all club matches—the great aim is to induce those participating in
-first-class cricket to don flannels in the minor game. There is one
-great inducement, and let all managers take note of it. Tempt the
-crack amateur by offering him plenty of opportunity to bowl. In county
-cricket the amateur, with not a dozen exceptions in 1902—all I recall
-are Messrs. F. S. Jackson, D. L. A. Jephson, E. M. Dowson, E. E. Steel,
-J. R. Mason, W. M. Bradley, G. H. Simpson Hayward, W. W. Odell, C. M.
-Wells, H. Hesketh Pritchard and B. J. T. Bosanquet—field out while the
-professionals conduct the attack. To most amateurs bowling is a joy
-all the sweeter for its rarity. The amateur will not resist the bait,
-and will come if he possibly can. There is no cricketer so easy to get
-on with, or who makes a house match go better, than a distinguished
-amateur. The bulk are absolutely without “side,” and having learnt the
-sterner discipline of first-class cricket, absolutely revel in their
-sporting holiday, while the effect of their presence on the rest of the
-side is electrical.
-
-With that I conclude. I could write more, if I ventured to trespass
-further on your attention. Should I have had the good fortune to divert
-and not to bore, I shall consider myself the luckiest in this band of
-writers, and after all, I have had the best of all topics. So, hurrah!
-and long life to country-house cricket!
-
-[Illustration: _From a Painting by Louis Belanger, belonging to H.M.
-the King._
-_A VILLAGE MATCH IN 1768._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER XII
-
-VILLAGE CRICKET
-
-By C. F. WOOD
-
-
-Constant readers of the _Pall Mall Gazette_ will not have missed a
-most amusing article on “Yokels at Cricket,” which appeared over the
-initials “R. E. M.” during the summer of this year of grace 1902. With
-a felicity of exaggeration which would do credit to Mark Twain, the
-writer describes his experiences on a pitch where the blocks were too
-large to begin with, and too numerous; where all that could be said
-of the fielding was that the men in the lost-ball region did their
-ferreting well; and where the fast ball shot, rose five feet, and shot
-again. Sometimes, he pathetically adds, the five-feet rise came last.
-
-Something of this kind possibly still exists in the remoter parts of
-our sportive country, but as it is my intention in the present paper
-to set down nothing about village cricket that has not come within the
-scope of my own experience, I must forego at the outset the attractions
-of these humorous irrelevancies, and speak the truth as far as I know
-it, even at the risk of making my contribution to this historic work
-unnecessarily serious.
-
-For the same reason I must deny myself the pleasure of dishing up once
-more the innumerable funny stories about village cricket that appear
-periodically in books of this kind; and I have further registered a
-solemn vow to leave the top-hat period severely alone, and make no
-reference to Fuller Pilch, Caffyn, Mynn, or any other belted heroes
-of prehistoric days. So what it comes to is this: I am going to put
-down here my own experiences and opinions of village cricket as it is
-played to-day by my own village eleven, of which I have the honour to
-be captain, and if the result turns out unsatisfactory and of little
-interest, kindly believe that the fault lies in my incapacity of
-expression, not in any lack of excitement in the cricket. _That_ at
-least is beyond reproach.
-
-Please don’t think from the above that, unlike the heroines of most
-of our modern stuffy plays, our club has no past! On the contrary,
-I have before me now the accounts of our village club right back to
-29th July 1865, when we expended the sum of £1: 7s. in the following
-irreproachable manner:—
-
- Umpire £0 10 6
- Dinner for ditto and scorer 0 8 0
- Six _Bell’s Life_ papers 0 1 0
- Stamps 0 1 0
- Ball 0 6 6
- —————————
- £1 7 0
-
-Four shillings apiece for the umpire’s and scorer’s “dinner” may seem
-expensive in these modern half-crown days, but judging from the next
-entry, we can only consider it an exceptionally moderate occasion. On
-21st September of the same year, when, if we may judge by 1902, the
-summer was just beginning, the same entry reads:—
-
- Dinner for ditto, scorer, and beer £0 11 0
-
-Whether the extra 3s. represents the amount of liquid refreshment
-required by the umpire and scorer alone, or in conjunction with those
-acting in similar capacities on the other side, whose integrity they
-thus thought to drown, does not transpire from the account.
-
-All these and many other like interesting matters are at the disposal
-of the gentleman who may still do for Kent cricket what Lord Alverstone
-and C. W. Alcock have done for Surrey in their _Surrey Cricket_, just
-published; but I must not break through my self-imposed rule and
-enlarge any further on these exploits of bygone days. Good old Kent!
-Where is the historian that shall do justice to your past glories? Or
-is it that the part is after all greater than the whole, and that when
-Philip Norman finished _West Kent Cricket_, there was nothing left
-unsaid?
-
-Now of all the various sorts of cricket that are played in and out of
-this country, I am prepared to maintain against all the writers in this
-or any other book that village cricket is at once the most amusing
-to watch, the most exciting to play, and of the greatest educational
-value to the English race. Notice, I do not call it the most scientific
-form of the game, though there is a special sort of science required
-to finish a match between 3 and 7 P.M. every Saturday afternoon! Let
-us first compare it, from a spectator’s point of view, with county
-cricket; and it will help to emphasise my point if I quote one or two
-reports of county matches culled at random from the daily press in
-August this year:—
-
-Notts _v._ Kent, at Nottingham. “Kent, holding a lead of 91 runs on
-their first innings, did not hurry themselves unduly in their second
-venture. Dillon took forty minutes to register a couple of singles”!
-
-Leicester _v._ Sussex, at Brighton. “On Saturday, Dr. Macdonald was
-in three hours and three-quarters for 48 runs, having in the previous
-innings made 33 in about two hours. In other words, he was batting five
-hours and forty-five minutes for 81 runs”! And the poor reporter adds
-drowsily, “It was a terribly monotonous performance.”
-
-Is not this a veritable caricature of cricket? Why, rather than watch
-such a game drag its dreary trail over three summer days, I would vow
-never to go near a ground again, and take to German skittles. Compare
-this “terribly monotonous performance” with the compressed interest
-of a whole match completed in four hours on a village green, with the
-supporters of each eleven shouting each other down, as the sun sinks
-all too rapidly in the western sky, and both runs and wickets are
-freely given away as the excitement rises to fever pitch. Which would
-you rather do, candid reader, if you had the choice? Stand on your hind
-legs in the field all one day, sit and smoke your tongue sore in the
-pavilion all the next, with a chance of getting a knock on the third,
-or join our village eleven on Saturday afternoon, and have four certain
-hours of unadulterated joy? Well, most of us would choose the county
-eleven, I suppose, though we should find it weary work.
-
-But here it strikes me I am poaching on other people’s preserves, and
-before I commit the indiscretion of mentioning country-house cricket,
-which is a subject my friend Mr. H. D. G. Leveson-Gower is treating in
-his usual masterly way, let me hasten back to my own little corner,
-from which I was an ass to stray.
-
-And yet, having gone so far, I ought perhaps to explain why I consider
-village cricket to be of so great an educational value to our race.
-And by education I do not mean the mechanical stuffing of an unwilling
-agent with knowledge for which he can never have any possible use,
-but rather the formation of all those characteristics which help to
-build up what we call a man—pluck, temper, self-restraint, respect
-for others, abnegation of self, _et hoc genus omne_. Now the people
-who play first-class cricket are divided into two categories—those
-with means and leisure who play for love of it and because they are
-good at it, and those who play because they are good at it and can
-make a living out of it; and though most of the above virtues can be
-cultivated to a certain extent in a team made up of these two classes,
-yet it is certain that the same spirit does not animate an eleven of
-amateurs and professionals as will work wonders in a village team made
-up of every rank in life, the parson, the cobbler, the squire’s son,
-and the blacksmith, all playing on an absolute equality, all playing
-for their side and not for themselves, all playing for glory and none
-for averages or talent-money.
-
-And now I really must tell you a little about our own village club. In
-the old days we always used to play on the Common, where the turf was
-excellent and the boundaries out of sight; but as London got nearer and
-nearer, and every train belched forth a volume of trippers right across
-the ground, we had to shift our quarters, and for £10 a year we now
-have a large but not exclusive interest in a ten-acre field. A large
-square, capable of providing about a dozen good wickets during the
-summer, is enclosed with posts and chains, and the patient labour of
-our groundman and umpire (who in his leisure hours is also a shoemaker
-and a lamplighter) is year by year producing better results. For
-although it is unwise to have a perfect pitch for half-day cricket,
-yet, on the other hand, it must not be dangerous, and with the limited
-means at the disposal of a village club, the happy medium is not easy
-to attain. As the seasons roll on, patches are repaired with turf
-“sneaked” from the Common, weeds are removed (some of them), manure
-and fine soil is bush-harrowed in, seed is sown, and every summer we
-congratulate ourselves that, if not yet quite like the Oval (which we
-do not want it to be!), at all events our ground is the envy of our
-neighbours. I should add that this year (1902) we had a whip-up and
-laid the water on, but only used it twice!
-
-Perhaps, in connection with our wicket, I may be allowed to recount a
-little reminiscence, still fresh in my memory, of the days when the
-pitch was not what it is now. A short-tempered and fiery member of an
-opposing team was batting, as he always did, in spectacles, when a
-rising ball from our local Lockwood hit him right in the face. Seeing
-what I supposed was his eye drop out on the pitch, I dashed forward
-to field and return it, only to discover one glass of the spectacles
-unbroken on the turf. Beyond a cut on the bridge of his nose, the man
-had suffered no hurt, but it was long before he paid us another visit,
-or the scorched grass recovered from his language.
-
-It is not necessary, but it is useful, to have some sort of a pavilion,
-even for Saturday afternoon matches, and we were lucky to get, some
-five or six years ago, for the cost of removal, an old Norwegian
-house, built of wood, with a corrugated iron roof, which suited
-our purpose admirably. It originally consisted of three rooms, two
-bed-rooms and a sitting-room between, and, by putting all the windows
-in the side facing the ground, altering the doors, and fitting up the
-interior with lockers, washing-places, store-room for the groundman,
-bat-racks, etc., we have quite sufficient accommodation for our
-purpose. We are also the proud possessors of a tea-tent, where every
-Saturday throughout the season, when there is a home match, our kind
-lady friends provide our opponents and ourselves with an excellent tea.
-This smacks perhaps of luxury, and wastes a little time, but you must
-remember that our matches are nearly always over before the time for
-drawing stumps arrives, and it is a great attraction for those of us
-who do not always get such a good tea for nothing! But more than this,
-it makes our weekly matches a cheery social gathering, it provides an
-enthusiastic gallery of lady friends and admirers, and thus adds a
-charm to the natural beauty of our ground which we should be extremely
-sorry to lose. In fact, I attribute much of the prosperity of our club
-to the kind interest of the ladies in the village, who do so much for
-us, and I should like to see their excellent example more generally
-followed elsewhere.
-
-Well, now we have got our ground, our pavilion, and our tea-tent, what
-about our officials and our members, and the all-important question of
-“subscription”? We have a president, captain, vice-captain, secretary,
-treasurer, and a committee of six members, all being elected fresh
-every season at the annual meeting. However, so far as my five years’
-experience goes, no change has been made except to fill up vacancies
-caused by death or removal, and the meeting is a merely formal affair
-where we re-elect each other _en bloc!_ The president in our case has
-always been the _persona_, or parson, of the parish, and where there is
-a curate, he is the best man, in my opinion, for the secretaryship. The
-advantages of this arrangement are obvious, for he is probably the only
-gentleman in the place who is there all day; he knows where all the
-villagers live, and it is easier for him than any one else to go round
-and get up the teams. For however much you print on your match-cards
-that “members wishing to play in any match should send in their names
-to the captain before Thursday evening,” or words to that effect, the
-fact remains that no villager has ever yet been known to _offer_ to
-play; and though a man may be thirsting for a place in a certain match,
-and would be seriously hurt if he were not asked, yet the only reply
-he will make to your pressing invitation is a half-hearted, “Well, I
-don’t mind if I do”! _But_, if the curate is not a good player, he
-should content himself with his secretarial duties, and not appear in
-the field. However excellent he may be in other ways, if he cannot
-hold a catch or keep his bat decently straight, he ought not to give
-the enemy occasion to blaspheme. As Dean Hole says in answer to his
-own question, “Is it right for a clergyman to hunt?” “On one immutable
-condition—_that you ride straight to hounds_.” We limit our committee
-to six members, chosen from every walk in life—a merchant, a farmer,
-a solicitor, a gardener, and so on—and in the diversity of opinions
-there is sometimes much wisdom. As a matter of fact, I have never found
-gardeners, as a class, of very much use in connection with cricket.
-They may know a little about turf, but, barring a few exceptions, they
-do not make good players. The reasons are not far to seek. From the
-very nature of their work, they have fewer opportunities than others
-of taking part either in practice or matches: in summer, there is
-always a lot of mowing, watering, and so on to do, and when a man has
-been working with his back, arms, and legs all day, he feels little
-inclined for more violent exertion. This too is probably why they are
-slower in their movements and clumsier with their hands and feet than
-most other people. But at least they take their waistcoats off, which
-a stableman never does. Now, why is that? It is almost a rule without
-an exception that a man who works in the stable in trousers, belt, and
-shirt, adds a waistcoat to his outfit before he goes in to bat. Still,
-waistcoat or no waistcoat, he is generally bright and quick, and with
-practice makes a smart field. Perhaps the best village cricketers,
-taking them all round, are recruited from the ranks of carpenters,
-footmen, blacksmiths, and schoolmasters, rather than from the stables
-and the gardens, but in any case it’s more than half the battle to get
-them young. There must be disappointments, of course. Some of the most
-promising boys lose their interest in the game when they think they are
-men, and become loafers; some go out to work in other places, and the
-team knows them no more; but you are amply repaid if two or three of
-one generation at last find their strength, and after a year or more of
-painstaking duck-eggs suddenly blossom out into consistent scorers, to
-the no small astonishment of their friends and their own huge delight.
-Don’t think from this that we set too much store by good batting. On
-the contrary, all our matches (and other people’s too!) are won or lost
-by fielding, and I can never tell my men too often that it does not
-do to give your opponent two, or even three, lives, when he has made
-up his mind to take yours at the very first opportunity. Only, as at
-golf the good drive gives one the greatest pleasure, though the high
-approach may be the prettiest shot, and the deadly put wins the hole,
-so at cricket the greatest pleasure of the greatest number is to make
-lots of runs, though they may not be wanted, when a good catch in the
-deep field or a smart return may win the match.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Sketch by_ _Robert Seymour._
-“_OUT, SO DON’T FATIGUE YOURSELF, I BEG, SIR!_”]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Water-Colour by_ _J. Hayllar._
-_A CRICKETER._]
-
-I mentioned just now the ominous word “subscription.” The question of
-finance is one which must enter to a large extent into the prosperity
-of a village, or any other, club, and happy those who have enough cloth
-to cut to ensure their coats fitting! In our own case we generally
-seem to have succeeded in making both ends meet, though, as will be
-seen from the following typical years’ figures, times were not always
-prosperous:—
-
- 1867. Receipts £34 4 0 Expenses £34 0 6
- 1877. ” 18 1 0 ” 17 0 2
- 1887. ” 14 1 11 ” 12 7 6
- 1897. ” 31 5 2 ” 34 19 6
- 1902. ” 47 8 6 ” 38 11 5
-
-I ought to add that these amounts represent only annual subscriptions
-and current expenses, and do not include special collections made for
-special purposes, such as enclosing the pitch in posts and chains,
-laying on the water, and so on. If a “round robin” is not sufficient
-to cover these extras, I generally find a good village concert in
-the winter is sufficient to wipe off any deficit. We have a minimum
-subscription for the villagers of 2s. 6d. a year, which is readily paid
-when they find it is a _sine qua non_; but the rule must be rigidly
-enforced, even to the exclusion of your best bowler, if he prove
-refractory! The amount collected in this way is of course trifling, yet
-without it I believe the club would very soon stop for want of members;
-for it is the experience of all who have many dealings with their
-village neighbours, that they do not value or take any interest in the
-thing which costs them nothing. Free education has been a sufficient
-curse to our villages without giving them free cricket too! The rest
-of our income is collected by the lamplighting, shoemaking, groundman
-and umpire, who goes round with a book to all the houses in the parish
-at what he considers the psychological moment, generally after dinner
-in the evening; for which extra labour he is accorded a commission
-of 1s. in the pound collected. The details of expenditure require
-no elucidation; they are the same in all cricket clubs; only the
-healthy countryman, with plenty of muscle, but no skill to apply it,
-will require at least twice as many bats every season as an ordinary
-cricketer. And mind you, they don’t go at the edges; they come right in
-half. Is it the stiff wrist? But when all is said and done, what fun it
-is! I have played most sorts of cricket—country-house cricket, club
-cricket, touring with my old school eleven, and so on, and once I even
-appeared for the county second eleven, when I was run out by a local
-tradesman before I had a ball; but none of them ever touched village
-cricket for pure, unadulterated amusement. My earliest recollection
-takes me back to a pretty little ground not far from Croydon, where
-a local schoolmaster enjoyed a great reputation as a demon underhand
-bowler. It was not so much the pace or the pitch that proved so
-disastrous to the batsmen, as the man himself. He _looked_ destructive
-from the moment he began his run, and as soon as the ball was delivered
-he used to ejaculate fiercely, “That’s got yer!” Whether such a remark
-at such a critical moment was entirely in accordance with the customs
-of the game, it never entered our heads to inquire; we only knew it
-generally had the desired effect.
-
-It was on this same ground, I remember, that Edward Norman, one of a
-distinguished family of Kent sportsmen, coming in last when his side
-wanted six runs to win, hit the first ball he received, a straight one
-well up, clean out of the ground to square leg, over the boundary road
-and a high wall into the kitchen garden of the local squire.
-
-Here too the head gardener of the same squire annually disports himself
-in spotless white, to his own huge gratification and the vast amusement
-of his numerous underlings. Not that they would dare to smile while
-the august eye is on them, for he is an autocrat in his way, and can
-both look and say unutterable things. Once, I remember, when he was
-taking part in a Married _v._ Single match, one of the under-gardeners
-had the misfortune to clean bowl him for a duck. He looked first at
-his shattered wicket, then at the spot where the ball had pitched, and
-proceeded to march solemnly towards the trembling and penitent bowler.
-We held our breath, fully expecting that some fearful tragedy was to
-be enacted, and that, having first brained the poor man with his bat,
-he would follow it up by giving him the sack on the spot. But when he
-had reached the middle of the pitch, he pulled himself together in the
-most dignified way, merely remarked, “Well bowled!” and stalked off to
-the pavilion. So even in his moment of defeat he was superior to most
-of us, for I have noticed it is generally considered etiquette in this
-class of cricket to _run_ to shelter as fast as you can, if you have
-taken no exercise between the wickets.
-
-[Illustration: _VILLAGE CRICKET IN 1832._]
-
-[Illustration:
- _From the Painting by_ _R. Wilson, R.A._
-_CRICKET AT HAMPTON WICK._]
-
-It would be in the highest degree imprudent for any one in my position
-to say a word against country umpires. And, to give them their due, I
-have almost always found them, in what some would call these degenerate
-modern days, to be as accurate and as honest as their brethren in more
-exalted spheres; but there are brilliant exceptions! “To play eleven
-men and an umpire” is, I am told, a chestnut in Gloucestershire, and
-one story I can vouch for certainly bears out the theory. It was a
-match between two old-standing village rivals, and contrary to custom,
-the visiting team turned up with twelve men, owing to the unexpected
-arrival of a fairly good player. Another member of the team, conscious
-of his own weakness, but with perhaps more cunning than good-nature,
-promptly offered to stand down, “for,” said he, with a sly wink to his
-captain, “I can be of more use to the side if I umpire!” That comes
-from Gloucestershire, but it is easily beaten by the remark of the real
-umpire in a village match in Oxfordshire last August. “How’s that?”
-shouted the wicket-keeper proudly, as he captured the ball straight off
-the edge of the bat. “Not out,” said the umpire, “_but it was a damned
-fine catch if he hit it_.” I do not wish for a moment to insinuate
-that our friends in the north are not always the good sportsmen we
-believe them to be, so we will put the following tale under the head of
-“exceptions.” The match, a two-day one, was being played at Whitehaven,
-in Cumberland; things had gone badly with the home team, and all the
-morning of the second day the local umpire had been engineering
-his opponents out in the most courageous way. But to everybody’s
-astonishment, when a confident appeal was made against the last man on
-the side, he gave him “Not out.” Struck by this sudden conversion, a
-friend asked him what the meaning of it was. “Well,” he said, “if I’d
-a given ‘im out, they wouldn’t ‘a stayed to loonch, and my father does
-the caterin’”!
-
-In one of the keenest matches I ever took part in (it was on the 16th
-of August 1902, and we won by four runs), two men of the opposite side
-were batting, one a very fair bat, and dangerous when set, the other
-a dubious quantity at all times. The bowler sent down a fast one to
-leg which the wicket-keeper failed to stop, and both men started for a
-bye. Meanwhile, short slip, backing up, had stopped the ball, and threw
-the near wicket down, while both men were apparently in the middle of
-the pitch. The good batsman refused to go, and the indifferent one
-apparently held no views on the subject, but stayed where he was, while
-the two umpires (I blush to record it) gave, almost unasked, an opinion
-favourable to their respective sides. Party feeling was running high,
-but I never allow any discussion in the field, and it was properly left
-to the umpire at the end where the wicket had been broken to give a
-decision. Unfortunately, it was their umpire, and the weak batsman had
-to go! And it was a fair decision. There was obviously a doubt, and he
-gave his own side the benefit of it. Who could do more? But we had our
-revenge on the gentleman who refused to go. He hit a lovely half-volley
-to square leg, which did not quite reach the boundary. My man was
-after it like a hare, and while they were trying to get the fourth
-run, he threw the wicket down full pitch from where he picked up the
-ball, at least 90 yards off, and with only one stump visible. A fluke,
-of course, but when I complimented him afterwards on his brilliant
-performance, which practically won us the match, he simply said, “Oh!
-that’s nothing, sir; I was always a bit of a slinger”!
-
-Our great annual event is, of course, the Married _v._ Single match,
-which takes place on the last Saturday of the season. In the old days,
-when we played on the Common, this was the occasion of what one might
-almost describe as a village orgie. Men turned up from everywhere, who
-never honoured the club with their patronage at other times, some even
-dressed, most appropriately, as clowns, and the cricket was distinctly
-of the “Dan Leno at the Oval” variety. Well, well, _Tempora mutantur
-et nos mutamur in illis_. It was doubtless very amusing, but there
-were objections, latterly even objectors (whether of the conscientious
-variety or not doesn’t matter), and the present tea-tent is in every
-way preferable to its rival “down the road.” So we play on our own
-field now, and get a very fair amount of amusement out of it, even
-without the clowns. I have tried for years to get up some sort of a
-representative married team before the day of the match, but it’s
-no use. They are all too old, or too stiff, or too busy. Yet when
-the eventful afternoon arrives, there are generally some fourteen or
-fifteen Benedicts ready to do battle for the honour of their wives and
-families, against a meagre dozen or so of the less fortunate Bachelors.
-Public enthusiasm, at all times keen in village cricket, reaches its
-high-water mark on this great day, and the ladies especially assemble
-in large numbers to do honour to the brave. Sympathy is invariably and
-entirely with the married men—I suppose because part of the audience
-are the wives of the team now stripping for the fray, and the other
-part hope that by next summer at latest they will be in the same proud
-position. On paper there can be no question that the Bachelors have
-the strongest side, but against their youth, their practice, and their
-skill we place our experience and our considerable numerical advantage,
-so there is not much in it. Then again, they look rather contemptuously
-at our weather-beaten ranks; say we have no bowling, can’t run (two
-of us are over seventy, certainly!), and are altogether as sorry
-a collection of prehistoric peeps as ever took the field. _Nous
-verrons!_ The Bachelors win the toss and start batting. An old man of
-sixty-seven, who has recently contracted a second matrimonial alliance
-to make sure of his place in the team, asks to keep wicket, and after
-buckling on a pair of lovely old faded yellow pads, he goes to say
-“Good-bye” to his new “missus,” and get her to pull his waistcoat down
-and stuff it inside the back of his trousers (this I saw myself). Then
-I arrange the rest of my veterans in a sort of inner and outer circle
-round the wickets, in places where they are least likely to be hurt,
-and the game begins. It is true we have no bowling, in the modern sense
-of the term, but it’s quite good enough for the Bachelors. At one end I
-put on our village umpire, who bowls fast straight underhand, literally
-“daisy-cutters,” and at the other a newly-married groom, just come into
-the parish, whose methods are precisely the same. Scoring is out of the
-question. You may stop the ball as long as your patience lasts, but you
-can’t get it away, and wicket after wicket falls, as the pick of my
-village eleven try in vain to turn fast sneaks into slow half-volleys.
-I feel quite sorry for them when the end comes, and twelve promising
-young cricketers, with “Mr. Extras,” have all been dismissed for 76.
-Then our turn comes, and the umpire and I make a good start by putting
-on 30 for the first wicket. But it’s not all over yet! Six wickets fall
-for an additional 9 runs, and the audience begins to hold its breath.
-We have still eight or nine batsmen, but can they possibly make 5 runs
-apiece? We are soon put out of suspense. The groom goes in for hitting,
-knocks up 15 in a few minutes, which demoralises the field, the best
-bowler is taken off at the critical moment, and the rest is easy. We
-have had a most thrilling afternoon’s cricket, and no one is any the
-worse except the old wicket-keeper, who is so stiff he cannot come
-downstairs for two days.
-
-I feel I ought to apologise for appearing in such august company as
-this book affords, but it is our cheery editor’s doing, not mine. My
-enthusiasm for the subject is the only excuse I can offer, and that he
-has kindly accepted, so I need say no more. Only I shall always regret
-that no more capable pen than mine was found to do justice to such an
-inspiring theme as “Village Cricket.”
-
-[Illustration: _AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY CARICATURE._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER XIII
-
-FOREIGN CRICKET
-
-By P. F. WARNER
-
-
-In this and the following chapters I shall endeavour to give some
-account of the many cricket tours in which I have been fortunate enough
-to take part, in the West Indies, the United States, Canada, Portugal,
-South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia.
-
-The days have long gone by since England was the only country in which
-the game flourished; for cricket is played, and played well, too, in
-the most remote corners of the British Empire.
-
-It has been my good luck to play cricket from Trinidad to Auckland,
-and from Buluwayo to Vancouver, so I hope there may be some interest
-in a record of the game under conditions widely different from those
-of Lord’s or Old Trafford—upon grounds that are within easy distances
-of volcanoes, and in towns that have since undergone siege and
-bombardment. In the course of my wanderings with bat and ball, I have
-covered nearly 80,000 miles by land and sea, and I have enjoyed every
-mile of my long journeyings, for the memories that one carries away
-from such tours as these are innumerable. May not one hope, too, that
-these touring teams are not altogether without value from the political
-side, for they must assuredly lead to a closer understanding and better
-appreciation of our kinsmen in Greater Britain.
-
-One hears nowadays so many remarks—as a rule far from
-complimentary—as to the status of amateur cricketers, that I take
-this opportunity of enlightening those whom it may concern as to the
-arrangements made with regard to the financial part of the six tours
-which are dealt with in this chapter.
-
-On the first tour to the West Indies we paid our own steamship tickets,
-and our wine and washing bills, cabs, etc., throughout the tour; all
-other expenses were paid by the clubs in the various islands. The
-trip to Oporto was a purely private affair, into which no question of
-expenses entered one way or the other. On my two visits to America, and
-the South African and New Zealand tours, all our expenses, excepting
-again our wine, washing, cabs, etc., were paid for us. Not one penny
-passes through the hands of either the captain or any other member of
-the team, and we have no interest whatever in the gate—that is the
-affair of the club which has invited the team out. The expenses of the
-tour are paid out of these gates, and the profits—and there is nearly
-always a profit—go to the body which has undertaken the risk of the
-tour. We are, in fact, the guests of the various places we visit.
-
-As captain of two teams in America, no money whatsoever passed through
-my hands. Our tickets were invariably taken for us, and we just stepped
-on to boat or railway, as the case might be. The hotel bills, with the
-exception of our bill for wine, washing, and smaller items, were sent
-in to the Associated Clubs of Philadelphia.
-
-Lord Hawke’s South African and New Zealand teams contained
-professionals, who, over and above their ordinary expenses of
-travelling and hotel bills, were guaranteed a lump sum of money, which
-was paid them by instalments. The amateur receives his expenses only;
-the professional his expenses _plus a lump sum_. There has been so much
-misunderstanding on this subject, that I shall, I hope, be excused for
-having dwelt upon it at some length.
-
-
-THE WEST INDIES
-
-Before the visit of R. S. Lucas’s team in the early part of 1895, the
-West Indies were quite unknown to the majority of English cricketers.
-That tour, however, showed that there was plenty of cricket scattered
-over the islands, which only needed encouragement to develop into a
-good class; and such delightful accounts did Lucas and his team bring
-back of the West Indies, that Lord Hawke had little difficulty in
-getting together an amateur side to go out a couple of years later.
-
-We sailed from Southampton in January 1897, and after a pleasant
-fortnight’s voyage arrived at Port of Spain, Trinidad. Here we opened
-with a big score against the Queen’s Park Cricket Club, but came to
-grief when opposing the island team, chiefly owing to some excellent
-bowling by two black men, Woods and Cumberbatch, on not a very easy
-wicket of the kind where one ball bumped and the next shot. But
-admitting that they received considerable assistance from the wicket,
-Woods and Cumberbatch bowled excellently, and took thirty-nine out of
-the forty wickets that fell in the two matches. As it happened, these
-two defeats were the only ones we experienced in the fourteen matches
-which we played, and though I do not by any means wish to make excuses,
-Trinidad certainly caught us at a disadvantage, as we had not become
-acclimatised to the great heat, and, moreover, had not had sufficient
-opportunities to get into form. But the Trinidad side were a good one,
-their strength lying in their bowling. The batting was, with one or two
-exceptions, rather rough, but the fielding was excellent, and this,
-coupled with the bowling of Woods and Cumberbatch, proved too much for
-us.
-
-Cricket is, or was at the time I was there, established on a firmer
-basis in Trinidad than in any other of the West Indian islands, and the
-game was well supported by all classes.
-
-From Trinidad we went to Grenada and St. Vincent, where our opponents
-were no match for us, though the St. Vincent eleven ran us close for a
-couple of days. The match was played on a matting wicket, which played
-fast and true, though every now and again the ball turned very quickly.
-
-At Barbados we had two splendid games, one of which we won after a
-most exciting finish, and the other ending in an even draw. Barbados
-and Trinidad were certainly the strongest teams in the West Indies
-five years ago, and there was little to choose between the two sides,
-Trinidad having perhaps the stronger bowling, and Barbados the better
-batting.
-
-Antigua, St. Kitts, and St. Lucia were weak, but Demerara were a very
-fair side, though they did not show their true form against us. In the
-smaller islands, such as Grenada, St. Vincent, Antigua, St. Kitts,
-and St. Lucia, we invariably met black men in the opposing teams,
-but in estimating the respective merits of Trinidad, Barbados, and
-Demerara, it must not be forgotten that Trinidad played their black
-professional bowlers against us, while Demerara and Barbados did not.
-In the Intercolonial Cup, which is played for every other year between
-the above-mentioned colonies, the custom was to exclude the black
-professionals, but I am glad to say that this has been altered since I
-was in the West Indies, and they are now allowed to take part in the
-Cup competition. The admittance of black professionals into the best
-games cannot but do good, as they add considerably to the strength of a
-side, and their inclusion must instil a universal enthusiasm for the
-game amongst all colours and classes of the population.
-
-Jamaica we did not visit, but I was told by more than one of the team
-which went out to the West Indies in the early months of 1901 that the
-cricket there does not attain to any high excellence.
-
-The wickets are not as a rule good, but there are exceptions, and the
-grounds at Barbados, Demerara, and Antigua provide excellent wickets
-in fine weather. It is hard enough to make runs on a sticky wicket in
-England, but it is easy in comparison with a West Indian wicket after
-rain, for under the influence of a powerful tropical sun, the ball
-not only takes any amount of break, but gets up perfectly straight as
-well. The Trinidad ground is the largest, and has the best pavilion and
-seating accommodation, while of the many grounds I have seen in various
-parts of the world, none surpasses it from a picturesque point of view;
-but the wicket is a very bad one, and I really think the authorities
-would be wise to lay down matting.
-
-The West Indian team which came to England in the summer of 1900 played
-seventeen games, won five, drew four, and lost eight, and when one
-considers that the team had never played together before, that they
-were quite unaccustomed to our climate, and to the strain of three
-days’ cricket, and that they lost the toss twelve times out of the
-seventeen matches the tour comprised, I do not think their record was
-at all bad. At the start the side were quite at sea, but they improved
-immensely as time went on, and towards the end of the tour showed some
-uncommonly good cricket. The result, too, of the visit of the last
-English team—by far the strongest of the three sides that have visited
-the West Indies—gave evidence that the cricket had improved in the
-islands, for out of the three test matches played, the West Indians won
-two, while Demerara twice defeated the Englishmen, and Barbados once.
-
-[Illustration: _A PARLIAMENTARY MATCH._
-_The Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, Lord John Russell, and
-others._]
-
-At the same time, it was generally felt that West Indian cricket had
-not altogether made the progress expected. There are several good
-bowlers, notably Burton, the best bowler in the West Indies, and Woods
-of Demerara, Lane of Barbados, and Smith of Trinidad; but though the
-fielding is excellent, the batting is weak, and of real knowledge of
-the game, especially in the art of placing the field, there is little,
-while the idea is far too prevalent that they have nothing more to
-learn about cricket. This comes, I fancy, from their having on three
-or four occasions beaten the English elevens which have played in the
-West Indies, quite forgetting that these sides are never more than
-fairly strong amateur combinations, with no pretensions to being called
-first-class.
-
-From every point of view, there can be nothing more enjoyable than
-a cricket tour in the West Indies. The climate is, at the time of
-year we were in the West Indies, quite delightful, and although the
-sun is undoubtedly very hot, it is by no means harmful, if ordinary
-precautions are taken. Abler pens than mine have painted the exquisite
-charm and beauty of the islands, and the hospitality of the people
-is beyond measure, the visit of an English team being an event which
-is eagerly looked forward to. The black portion of the population is
-especially enthusiastic. They climb the trees round the ground, and
-keep up a running comment on the game, and it is somewhat disconcerting
-to hear a huge shout of “Bowl him out, Clif,” go up as the bowler runs
-up; but this was what happened in Barbados when I was batting, “Clif”
-being Clifford Goodman, the great Barbados bowler. Lord Hawke was a
-source of joy to the native mind. On going out to bat he was generally
-greeted with shouts of “Welcome, my lord,” followed by an exhortation
-to the bowler to “give the lord a duck.” Once, indeed, at St. Vincent
-the bowler did not disappoint the crowd, for Lord Hawke retired first
-ball, whereupon the scene which followed was, I venture to think,
-unique. First of all the bowler turned a somersault on the pitch, a
-way of evincing delight at the dismissal of an opponent one does not
-usually see at Lord’s or the Oval; but after he had gone through his
-acrobatic performances, it was even more interesting to watch the
-crowd, who threw their hats in the air, danced about in front of the
-ring, shook hands with one another, chattering and shouting the while.
-It was the most extraordinary scene I have ever witnessed on a cricket
-ground; but the West Indian negro goes quite mad about cricket, and
-when A. E. Stoddart was in Barbados, hundreds of them used to gather
-round his hotel on a chance of getting a glimpse of the great man.
-With more coaching from English professionals, and with a readier
-desire to assimilate the lessons taught, there is no reason whatever
-why cricket in the West Indies should not attain a high standard, for
-the West Indian seems to take quite naturally to the game, and the
-climate is admirably suited to the bringing of cricket to perfection.
-
-One or two of the grounds, notably that of Georgetown, Demerara, are
-well cared for, but, speaking generally, there is much ignorance
-displayed in the preparation of wickets, and it would be almost worth
-while to have some man out from England to put the various grounds in
-order, and impart instruction to the native groundsmen. The Trinidad
-ground is infested with mole crickets, and the wicket is so impossible
-that, unless matting is put down, cricket will languish, for no young
-cricketer can be taught to bat really well on such a wicket, and a
-bowler may be in danger of thinking himself a good one, when in fact he
-is only just beginning to bowl.
-
-My second tour was to America in the autumn of 1897, when I captained a
-fairly strong team, which included, amongst others, G. L. Jessop and F.
-G. Bull, the latter about that time the best slow bowler in England.
-
-In discussing the strength of American cricket, it is as well to bear
-in mind that American cricket means Philadelphian cricket, for nowhere
-else in the United States does the game really flourish, though a few
-enthusiastic supporters do their utmost to keep it going in New York
-and Baltimore.
-
-In Philadelphia, base-ball is quite a secondary consideration, and
-there is a genuine enthusiasm for our great national game. The grounds
-themselves are superb, but the wickets are not good, though English
-cricketers are scarcely, perhaps, in a position to pass judgment on
-them, seeing that teams from this country never play in Philadelphia
-before the middle or end of September, when, owing to the abundance
-of what is termed “fall grass,” it is no easy matter to obtain a good
-wicket.
-
-The Philadelphian eleven, as I saw them on the occasion of my first
-visit, were a distinctly good side. They had quite a lot of batting, a
-brilliant wicket-keeper in Scattergood, and, in J. B. King and P. H.
-Clark, two bowlers distinctly above the average of amateur cricketers.
-King, indeed, on his day is a remarkably good bowler, while Clark has
-been almost invariably successful against English elevens. My eleven
-played two matches against the Gentlemen of Philadelphia. The first we
-lost by four wickets, and the second we won by seven wickets, though it
-is only right to say that in this game the Philadelphians were without
-J. A. Lester, the best batsman in the States.
-
-On the second tour to America, in September and October 1898, I had
-not, perhaps, quite such a strong team as in the previous year, but
-as the side included F. Mitchell, C. O. H. Sewell, C. J. Burnup, V.
-T. Hill, B. J. T. Bosanquet, and J. L. Answorth, it was not weak. On
-this, my last visit to America, the cricket in Philadelphia seemed to
-have fallen off. J. B. King and P. H. Clark were as good as ever,
-Scattergood was the same brilliant wicket-keeper, and the fielding
-was absolutely A1, but the batting had gone off deplorably. Our first
-match was fought out on a sticky, difficult pitch, when we won very
-easily by eight wickets, hardly any of our opponents having any idea
-of playing on such a wicket. The return match was played on a good
-wicket, certainly by far the best I have seen in America, and again we
-won, but this time only after a desperate battle. When the sixth wicket
-went down, we wanted 30 runs to win, and as the side possessed a most
-distinct tail, the result was decidedly open to doubt. However, some
-fine hitting by Hill enabled us to pull through by four wickets.
-
-K. S. Ranjitsinhji and B. J. T. Bosanquet have both taken teams to
-Philadelphia since I was last there, but Ranjitsinhji’s eleven was
-absurdly strong, and won anyhow, though the Philadelphians had the
-worst of the luck in having to bat on slow wickets, on which they do
-not shine. B. J. T. Bosanquet’s eleven won one and lost one match with
-the Philadelphians, the Americans being seen to great advantage in the
-game they won, and quite outplaying the Englishmen, who lost by no less
-than 229 runs. Bosanquet had, too, a very fair team, including E. M.
-Dowson, E. R. Wilson, R. E. More, F. Mitchell, and V. F. S. Crawford,
-but the Englishmen admittedly played very much below their true form.
-
-There seems to be more good cricket played in and around Philadelphia
-to-day than was the case some two or three years ago, and, generally
-speaking, the game seems on the up-grade, so that I shall be surprised
-if the team which is to visit England this summer does not prove to be
-the best that the Philadelphians have ever sent us.
-
-I have already mentioned that Philadelphia is the only place in America
-where the game has taken a firm hold, but New York has in M. R. Cobb a
-distinctly good cricketer. He is a very fair bat, and an excellent slow
-to medium right-hand bowler, of the type that one would wish to see
-more of in America, American bowlers being as a rule of the tearaway,
-erratic type. Cobb’s record against English teams is a very good one,
-and he was, next to J. B. King, the best cricketer I saw in the States
-in 1897 and 1898.
-
-On my first American tour, except for a visit to Niagara, we did not go
-to Canada at all, but matches were arranged at Montreal and Toronto for
-the second trip.
-
-At Montreal we played against XIV. of Eastern Canada, and won by 88
-runs; but the ground, which is used as a skating-rink for six months
-in the year, is appalling. There was a certain amount of keenness for
-the game, but to enable cricket to flourish, a cricket ground must be
-obtained.
-
-The ground at Toronto is a very fair one, and the Canadian eleven
-was certainly the best side we met, next to the Philadelphians, but
-little enthusiasm was shown, and cricket is not, I fear, in a very
-satisfactory condition.
-
-[Illustration: _A MATCH AT IGLOOLIE, BETWEEN H.M. SHIPS “FURY” AND
-“HECLA”._]
-
-Outside Philadelphia there is, as I have pointed out, little or no
-cricket in America, but in Philadelphia itself the game flourishes, and
-our matches were followed with the greatest enthusiasm. The ordinary
-writer on cricket in America knows little about the game, but his
-headlines and comments are exceedingly amusing. We were invariably
-referred to as “British Lions,” and we were assured that the American
-girl had “just a little liking for sure-enough Englishmen.” Again, when
-the Philadelphians defeated us, one of the Philadelphia papers came out
-with a long leading article entitled, “Waterloo for Englishmen,” in
-which the fact that we had been beaten at our own game was duly rubbed
-into us.
-
-Cricket has many difficulties to contend with throughout the United
-States. In the first place, the Americans are a busy nation, and have
-no leisure to devote themselves as energetically as we do to cricket,
-while, except in Philadelphia, base-ball always has been, and always
-will be, the national game. But in Philadelphia the future of cricket
-is assured, for I have met there some of the keenest and most ardent
-followers of the noble game.
-
-A great many people would, I imagine, scarcely believe that cricket is
-played in Portugal; but wherever two or three Englishmen are gathered
-together, there will wickets be pitched and creases marked out, and
-as the English colony in Oporto numbers a few thousands, it is not
-surprising to find the game in full swing in the beautiful town on the
-banks of the Douro.
-
-It was as a member of T. Westray’s eleven that I had the pleasure of
-playing cricket in Oporto in the spring of 1898. Our captain, a former
-leader of the Uppingham team, had got together a very fair side, which,
-with L. C. U. Bathurst and H. R. Bromley Davenport to bowl, and R. N.
-Douglas and S. A. P. Kitcat as the principal batsmen, proved far too
-good for our opponents. We won the first match against an Oporto eleven
-by an innings and 103 runs, Douglas making 106, and our two crack
-bowlers, with the assistance of A. C. Taylor, dismissing Oporto for 33
-and 118. Our total was 254, but had the Oporto eleven possessed even
-a moderately good fast or medium-paced bowler, we should not have got
-100, for the wicket was almost dangerous. I have a vivid recollection
-of being hit on the forehead by a slow half-volley which jumped
-straight up. The Oporto fielding was good, but the bowling very poor
-indeed, half-volleys on the leg stump and long hops being frequent.
-
-Our next opponents were Portugal, three Englishmen coming over from
-Lisbon to take part in the match; but here again we won almost as
-easily by an innings and 75 runs, though the cricket of our rivals
-showed some improvement, the bowling being of a better length, and
-the fielding decidedly surer. But cricket in Oporto is confined to
-twenty or thirty enthusiasts, so that the game cannot be taken at all
-seriously. Something will have to be done to the wicket, which at
-present is deplorable, for the soil itself is very sandy, and plantains
-seem to take root again as fast as they are cut out. The best plan
-would be to lay down cocoanut matting, but the cricketers in the _leal
-e invicta citade_ (the loyal and unconquered city) are rather proud of
-the fact that theirs is the only ground in Spain or Portugal in which a
-grass wicket is obtainable.
-
-None of the Portuguese took even the slightest interest in our visit,
-beyond a paragraph in the local paper stating that the “afamados
-loquedores de cricket” had arrived, and that the enthusiasm for cricket
-in England was even greater than that shown for bull-fighting in Spain,
-and that the names of Grace, Abel, Ranjitsinhji, and Maclaren were in
-England as well known as the names of Guerita, Marrantini, Perate, and
-Carajello, the famous bull-fighters, were in Spain.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER XIV
-
-CRICKET IN SOUTH AFRICA
-
-By P. F. WARNER
-
-
-On 3rd December 1898 I left England on my fifth tour abroad as a member
-of Lord Hawke’s South African team. The side was a powerful one,
-including such men as F. Mitchell, C. E. M. Wilson, the late F. W.
-Milligan, Trott, Tyldesley, Cuttell, Haigh, and Board.
-
-After a delightful voyage in the _Scot_, we arrived at Cape Town, and
-during the next four months played cricket from Table Mountain almost
-to the Zambesi and back again, visiting Johannesburg, Pretoria,
-Kimberley, Port Elizabeth, Grahamstown, King William’s Town, Graaf
-Reinet, and Buluwayo.
-
-Lord Hawke’s was the fourth English team to go to South Africa, Major
-Wharton, W. W. Read, and Lord Hawke himself having in previous years
-taken out sides.
-
-In any review of South African cricket, the first thing to be
-remembered is that, from one end of the great continent to the other,
-you never by any possible chance see a grass wicket, matting being used
-everywhere. On the Newlands ground, Cape Town, and at Port Elizabeth,
-the matting is stretched over grass, and this makes a wicket which
-enables the bowler to get considerable work on, though the ball does
-not come off the pitch very quickly. It is not an easy wicket, for
-a half-volley does not seem the same thing as on grass, and forcing
-strokes generally are at a discount. This kind of wicket affords most
-excellent practice, for it teaches one above everything else to watch
-the ball.
-
-Tyldesley did make a very fine 112 at Cape Town, and Sinclair, the
-South African cricketer, an equally fine 106, but the ball nearly
-always beat the bat, and Haigh in particular brought off some great
-bowling triumphs. The work he used to get on the ball was prodigious;
-he thought nothing of pitching six inches outside the off stump,
-and then hitting the leg stump. Trott, too, did one or two fine
-performances, while Rowe, Middleton, and Sinclair were at times almost
-equally successful.
-
-At Port Elizabeth the out-field is of grass, but the wicket seemed to
-me even more difficult than at Cape Town, for the ball, besides taking
-a lot of break, turned very quickly. Perhaps, however, I am unduly
-influenced by the fact that I made “spectacles” at Port Elizabeth—a
-favourite ground, by the way, for Englishmen to fail on, for more than
-one well-known cricketer has “bagged a brace” there.
-
-Cape Town and Port Elizabeth are the only two cricket grounds in South
-Africa which can boast of a grass out-field; all the other grounds
-are absolutely innocent of a blade of grass, being nothing, indeed,
-but a brown-reddish sand—somewhat like the colour of the sand on the
-seashore—rolled into a flat and hard surface. The matting is stretched
-on this sand, and makes a hard, true, and very fast wicket, while the
-ball, once past a fielder, simply flies to the boundary.
-
-The Wanderers’ ground, Johannesburg, is by far the best ground in South
-Africa, for the wicket is exceptionally fast, and the out-field level
-and true. At Kimberley there is a good wicket, but the out-field is
-rather rough, which may be said with truth of nearly all South African
-grounds, except the Wanderers’. Natal we did not visit, but I am told
-that the Maritzburg Oval is in almost every respect the equal of the
-Wanderers’ ground.
-
-[Illustration: _A STATE MATCH._
-_The Duke of Wellington bowling out Lord Brougham._]
-
-It will be seen from what I have said that matting wickets differ
-according as to whether they are laid on grass or otherwise. Matting
-stretched on grass gives the bowler more than a two-to-one chance, but
-matting on the bare grassless ground favours the batsman, though I am
-inclined to think that a really good bowler ought always to be able to
-make the ball “nip” a bit. Haigh certainly made the ball turn every now
-and again on the Wanderers’ ground, and both he and Albert Trott have
-told me that they would infinitely prefer to bowl on the best matting
-wicket in the world rather than on a really hard, true turf pitch.
-
-But the matting at Johannesburg is good enough for the most fastidious
-batsman, for it plays very fast, and though the pace of the wicket is
-apt to put a batsman off on first going in, once a man has got his eye
-in, he can make any amount of forcing strokes on both sides of the
-wicket, for the ball does not often hang on the pitch. Drives between
-cover and extra cover, and push strokes between the bowler and mid-on
-and past mid-on, can be made with great frequency, while the ball
-travels to the boundary at a great pace.
-
-Bowlers of the type of Haigh, Tate, or Howell (the Australian) are
-the most successful on matting wickets, but slow bowlers are not, as
-a rule, effective, and fast bowlers, unless really great ones, are
-usually heavily punished.
-
-The ordinary spikes one uses in England are quite useless on the
-matting, and have to be replaced by a sort of flat nail.
-
-The length of the matting varies in different places, and this, I
-venture to think, causes great inconvenience. At present the matting
-may be any length up to 22 yards, and often I found myself standing
-at one wicket with both feet off the matting, at another time with
-both feet on, and at another with one foot off and the other on the
-matting, while at Cape Town the pins which keep the matting down were
-placed just where the ordinary batsman puts his right leg. The South
-African Cricket Association might very easily pass a law making the
-matting uniform throughout the country, and in my opinion the matting
-should stop about a foot in front of the popping-crease. This is the
-length at Johannesburg. A captain may if he desires have the matting
-stretched tight at the commencement of each innings. In that case the
-pins are removed from the end and side of the matting, which is then
-well stretched by scores of Kaffirs, and afterwards firmly pinned into
-the ground. As a rule, however, merely the end pins are removed for
-a minute or two, the matting is given a pull, the pins replaced, and
-the matting swept, for pieces of grit and sand are very apt to collect
-on the mat, and a batsman has to look out for this while he is at the
-wickets.
-
-The great difficulty which frequently besets a captain on turf wickets,
-as to which roller he will put on at the commencement of his side’s
-innings, or at the beginning of the day’s play, is removed, for no
-rolling of the matting is necessary. Towards the end of an innings the
-matting is apt to get a trifle loose, and batting is no fun then, for
-should the ball pitch on one of the creases in the matting, it will
-probably break very quickly; and in this case the last few batsmen have
-the worst of the wicket. Winning or losing the toss, of course, makes
-no difference whatever, and rain, too, has little or no effect on the
-state of the pitch. One great advantage of these sandy grounds is that
-play is nearly always possible within a few minutes after the heaviest
-shower. I have seen the Johannesburg ground absolutely under water and
-resembling a lake, and yet play in progress within three-quarters of an
-hour after the rain had ceased.
-
-Cricket on matting is not half such a good game as cricket on turf, but
-as there is no turf worthy the name in South Africa, South Africans
-have no other alternative but to play on matting. There is at first, to
-one accustomed to grass wickets, an air of unreality about the whole
-thing, and the game does not seem to be quite the same cricket we
-learnt in England. For the first few weeks I hated the “mat,” but after
-a while one becomes more at home on it, and at the end of the tour I
-was quite fond of a matting wicket—though I never could agree with
-those who said that they preferred it to grass. One thing is certain,
-and that is, that playing for three or four months on matting wickets
-does improve one’s batting, and makes one a more resourceful player.
-At Johannesburg, Kimberley, and the grassless grounds, forward play
-and hard forcing strokes score tremendously, but at Cape Town and Port
-Elizabeth forcing forward strokes are at a discount; the man who can
-play back well will make the most runs.
-
-Lord Hawke’s team played seventeen matches, won fifteen, and drew two.
-Five eleven-a-side matches were played, viz. two games _v._ All South
-Africa, two against Cape Colony, and one against the Transvaal.
-
-At Cape Town we played a couple of games with XIII. of the Western
-Province, the remaining fixtures being chiefly against XV’s.
-
-At Cape Town we just won our first match by 25 runs against a Western
-Province XIII., chiefly owing to some grand bowling by Trott, Cuttell,
-and Haigh, the Yorkshireman taking five wickets for 14 runs at the
-crisis of the game. The highest total in the match was 149, and the
-highest individual score 45 by H. H. Francis. Murray Bisset, who
-captained the South African XI. in England, batted well in both
-innings, and Rowe and Middleton took seventeen of our wickets between
-them.
-
-The return game saw us victorious by 106 runs, for we were all in
-better form by this time, and more accustomed to the eccentricities
-of the mat. Rowe and Middleton did even better than before, taking
-nineteen wickets between them, while Trott and Haigh bowled splendidly
-for us.
-
-From Cape Town we went in turn to Graaf Reinet, Port Elizabeth,
-Grahamstown, and King William’s Town, victory awaiting us at each
-place. At King William’s Town we drew lots for the order of going in,
-and F. Mitchell and Tyldesley put on over 100 runs for the last wicket;
-but the most interesting thing about this match was a splendidly-hit
-innings of 66 by Giddy, who scored his runs in three-quarters of an
-hour. He twice hit Milligan out of the ground, and scored 16 off one
-over of Haigh’s (there were five balls to the over at that time).
-
-[Illustration:
- _Engraved by R. Dunkarton._ _After W. Redmore Bigg, R.A._
-_THE SOLDIER’S WIDOW OR SCHOOL BOY’S COLLECTION._]
-
-We had a long railway journey from King William’s Town to Johannesburg,
-but after forty-five hours in the train arrived at the “Golden City,”
-where a warm welcome awaited us, the station platform being crammed
-with cricket enthusiasts.
-
-We stayed about three weeks in Johannesburg, and in that time played
-three matches—the first against a Johannesburg XV., which ended in a
-somewhat uninteresting draw; the second against a Transvaal XI., whom
-we defeated by an innings and 201 runs; and the third against All South
-Africa, which we also won, though only after a desperate struggle.
-
-Sinclair batted and bowled well for the Johannesburg XV., and Halliwell
-kept wicket superbly, while Frank Milligan did a very good bit of
-bowling, for in the Johannesburgers’ first innings he sent back ten men
-for but 64 runs, keeping up a good pace all the time, and making the
-ball do a bit every now and again.
-
-In the match against the Transvaal, Tyldesley played splendidly for
-114, Mitchell made an equally fine 162, and Trott knocked up 101 in
-a short time, our total of 539 for six wickets being, I believe, the
-highest total ever made in South Africa.
-
-We won the game against South Africa by 33 runs, Lord Hawke’s XI.
-making 145 and 237, and South Africa 251 and 99. It was a splendid
-fight, and at one time we looked hopelessly “in the cart”; but Trott,
-Haigh, and Cuttell bowled magnificently when our opponents went in to
-get the runs, while the fielding was extremely smart, and in our second
-innings I was lucky enough to get 132 not out. But fortune was on my
-side, as I was missed at point when I had made 94, and I rather fancy I
-was stumped when I had got about 70.
-
-For South Africa, Sinclair played a fine free innings of 86, and was
-unlucky in being run out, and Llewellyn got 38 in the first innings,
-and Bisset 35 and 21 not out. Llewellyn, Middleton, and Rowe, all
-left-handers, took the great majority of our wickets, and we ought
-really to have lost the match, but one or two of the South Africans
-played rather recklessly in their second innings, and the dismissal of
-Sinclair in the second over—caught at mid-off from a tremendous skyer,
-by Cuttell off Haigh—seemed to destroy the confidence of the side,
-though Bisset played some bowling of the highest class with great skill.
-
-The loss of this match was a tremendous blow to supporters of cricket
-in South Africa, and the disappointment in Johannesburg was keen. The
-game was followed with the closest attention, and on the second day
-about 8000 people were present, the takings at the gate, irrespective
-of stand money, amounting to £470. At Lord’s or the Oval one can see
-the best cricket in the world for the modest sixpence, but half-a-crown
-was the lowest sum one could get into the Wanderers’ ground for during
-Lord Hawke’s visit to Johannesburg. As a proof of the interest taken
-in the match, the scores were posted up at various centres in the town
-and along the reef at intervals of an hour.
-
-Just before meeting the combined South African team we had played a
-two-day match against a local XV. at Pretoria, whom we defeated by nine
-wickets. Braund, the Somerset professional, was at that time acting as
-coach to the Pretoria Club, and his all-round cricket was splendid, for
-he made 41 runs, took six wickets, and brought off three fine catches.
-
-From Johannesburg we went to Kimberley, and there defeated a
-Griqualand West XV. by an innings and 25 runs. Most of us made runs,
-for the bowling was weak, and lent itself to free hitting. Shalders
-of Kimberley made 76 by very good cricket, late cutting and hooking
-particularly well, playing our professional bowlers with great
-confidence. The heat all through this game was almost unbearable, and
-we were glad to get away to the cooler climate of Buluwayo, where we
-played and won two matches, defeating a Buluwayo XVIII. and XV. of
-Rhodesia. Our bowling was altogether too good for our opponents, three
-or four of whom, however, showed good form. At this period of the tour
-Haigh was bowling superbly, and it took a really good batsman to make
-any runs against him.
-
-An expedition to the Matoppos was not the least interesting part of a
-delightful ten days in Rhodesia, and the visit of the first English
-team to Rhodesia was, I think I may safely say, a great success.
-Certainly Lord Hawke’s team enjoyed every moment of it.
-
-On the way down from Buluwayo we played another match at Kimberley,
-which was spoilt by heavy rain, and then, after spending two or three
-days at Matjesfontein with Mr. J. D. Logan, we returned to Cape Town
-for the last two matches. We beat Cape Colony by an innings and 29
-runs, Haigh performing the hat trick, and Cuttell and Wilson making
-98 and 69 respectively, and on Easter Tuesday wound up the tour with
-a victory over South Africa; but, as at Johannesburg, our opponents
-headed us in the first innings, Sinclair, six wickets for 26 runs,
-being chiefly responsible for a miserable total of 92, a score which
-the South Africans headed by 85 runs. Sinclair played a really great
-innings. He made 106 out of 147 while he was at the wicket by splendid
-cricket, driving with great power, and repeatedly bringing off a
-powerful back stroke.
-
-Tyldesley (112) played in his best form in our second innings, and as
-nine men made double figures, we ran up a total of 330, which left
-South Africa 246 runs to win. The general feeling was that we should
-win by 50 or 60 runs, but after Shalders and Powell had scored 11 for
-the first wicket, Haigh and Trott got on the war-path, and in an hour
-South Africa were all out for 35! Haigh took six wickets for 11 runs,
-and Trott four wickets for 19 runs. Sinclair only made 4 this time,
-magnificently caught in the long field by Milligan.
-
-A few days later we left Cape Town on the _Norman_, leaving Milligan
-behind, of whom, alas! it had been written in the Book of Destiny that
-he should never return to England, for fifteen months later he gave his
-life for his country while fighting gallantly outside Mafeking, and his
-bright and fascinating personality was taken from the cricket field. He
-is buried at Ramathlabama, but, though he lies so far away, to those
-who knew him well, as I am glad to think I did, his memory is ever dear.
-
-The first English team to visit South Africa was Major Wharton’s,
-in the winter of 1888-89. In those days the railway had not, I
-fancy, reached even Bloemfontein—certainly there was no railway to
-Johannesburg, and much of the travelling was done by ox waggon. Major
-Wharton’s eleven played only two eleven-a-side matches—both against
-South Africa—and won both, the second by an innings and 202 runs.
-
-W. W. Read’s eleven beat South Africa in the only match played by an
-innings and 189 runs, and Lord Hawke’s first team won their three test
-matches quite easily, but his second team, of which I was a member,
-only just beat South Africa at Johannesburg, and in the return at Cape
-Town our opponents more than held us for two days. We did not lose a
-match on the tour, but three or four times we had to fight hard to win.
-
-The South African eleven which toured in England in 1901 did very
-fairly, showing plenty of sound cricket, and giving evidence that in
-a few years South Africa might hope to play the very best counties
-with every chance of success, while the good form shown against the
-Australians last autumn has gone far to strengthen the opinion which I
-had already formed that cricket has a great future before it in South
-Africa.
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER XV
-
-CRICKET IN NEW ZEALAND
-
-By P. F. WARNER
-
-
-It was on 12th November 1902 that I started from Liverpool as captain
-of a team for New Zealand. This was my sixth cricket tour abroad, and
-Lord Hawke was originally to have captained the side; but the sudden
-illness of his mother prevented his starting, and he did me the honour
-of inviting me to lead the side in his absence. Those, like myself, who
-have had the good luck to go on tour with Lord Hawke know full well
-what his absence meant, for his unrivalled powers of management, his
-tact, influence, and close attention to detail are important factors
-in the successful conduct of a cricket tour. Though the Yorkshire
-captain, to the regret of every one on the side, and of no one more
-than myself, was unable to accompany us, the team was everywhere known
-as “Lord Hawke’s team,” and we wore his colours—dark blue, light blue,
-and yellow—so well known on cricket grounds all over the world. The
-side Lord Hawke had got together was a good average English county
-team—that is to say, if it entered for the county championship it
-would at the end of a season probably be found halfway up the list, and
-possibly higher—and consisted of P. F. Warner, C. J. Burnup, F. L.
-Fane, T. L. Taylor, E. M. Dowson, B. J. T. Bosanquet, J. Stanning, P.
-R. Johnson, A. E. Leatham, A. D. Whatman, Hargreave, and Thompson.
-
-The _Majestic_ of the White Star Line made a quick passage to New York,
-whence we were whirled across the American continent to San Francisco,
-learning on the way that railway speed in America does not necessarily
-imply safety, for we had a couple of accidents, one of which ended
-fatally to a fireman, which delayed our arrival at San Francisco. Here
-we spent a couple of delightful days, on one of which we played and
-defeated XVIII. of California. Leaving San Francisco on 27th November,
-we stopped on our long voyage across the Pacific at Honolulu and Pago
-Pago, eventually arriving at Auckland on 16th December. A few days
-later we began the first match of the tour, and from then until 6th
-March we were kept pretty hard at work, travelling about the country
-and playing cricket. We played in all eighteen matches—eleven against
-odds—and won them all, not a single game being lost or drawn. This
-was in itself a wonderfully good record; but cricket in New Zealand
-is at the present moment up to no very high standard, and the results
-of three-quarters of the matches were a foregone conclusion before a
-ball had been bowled. We had a close game with a West Coast XXII. on
-a matting wicket, only winning by five wickets (on this occasion we
-had a long tail, for Bosanquet and Dowson were away fishing), and the
-Canterbury XI. and the New Zealand team in the first test match gave us
-a fair game; but we were almost always winning comfortably, most of our
-victories being gained in a single innings.
-
-The New Zealand XI. were a very fair side, but they were in no way
-equal to us, for we won both matches easily, the first by seven wickets
-and the second by an innings and 22 runs. In both of these games we
-lost the toss, though in the first match it was probably an advantage
-to do so.
-
-There were but seven eleven-a-side matches—against Auckland,
-Wellington, Canterbury, Otago, South Island, and the two New Zealand
-games. Auckland, South Island, Otago, and the second test match were
-won in an innings, Wellington were beaten by ten wickets, Canterbury by
-133 runs, after declaring our innings closed, and the New Zealand XI.
-in the first test match by seven wickets.
-
-The two best batsmen in New Zealand are D. Reese of Canterbury and K.
-Tucker of Wellington; and it is remarkable that they should stand so
-clearly out from the rest. Of the two, Reese is, perhaps, the better.
-He scored two hundreds out of the eight innings he played against
-us—111 for Canterbury and 148 for New Zealand in the second test match
-at Wellington. He is undoubtedly a fine left-handed batsman—very
-similar in style and method to H. G. Garnett of Lancashire—with all
-those brilliant off-side strokes so characteristic of nearly all
-left-handed batsmen, and particularly good on the leg side. His weak
-point is in the slips, where he is apt to give a chance on first going
-in. Besides his batting, Reese is by no means a bad left-handed slow
-bowler, and a beautiful field at extra cover—in a word, a thorough
-cricketer. Tucker is a sound batsman who watches the ball well, has
-a good off drive and cut just behind point, and a very clever stroke
-between mid-on and short leg, which he uses to great advantage. He
-nearly always got runs against us, scoring 84, 50, 67, and 21 in four
-out of six knocks. On a rather difficult wicket at Christchurch,
-when our bowlers were turning the ball, he played very good and safe
-cricket—not so brilliant, perhaps, as Reese, but sounder, and a cool
-player. Leaving Reese and Tucker out of the question, there is no one
-in New Zealand who can be classed as a first-class bat. There are many
-very fair batsmen, who, with coaching, and with more practice and
-experience, would probably become first-class, but judged merely by
-what I saw, Reese and Tucker are the only two men whose batting attains
-to anything like first-class form.
-
-The bowling is infinitely stronger than the batting, and is really
-quite good, Callaway—whom Mr. Stoddart will remember as bowling well
-against his 1894-95 Australian team—Frankish, Downes, Fisher, M’Arthy,
-and Upham being quite useful. Frankish and Fisher are left-handed
-medium pace, Upham is a fast right-hander, Downes slow right, and
-M’Arthy medium right.
-
-Frankish, in my opinion, is the best bowler in New Zealand, for he
-keeps a good length, being especially difficult to drive or force
-forward, and with a nice high action makes the ball swing a good deal
-with his arm. On all wickets I should consider him distinctly the best
-bowler we played against.
-
-Downes, even on a hard, true wicket, gets a great deal of work from
-the off on the ball, but his action is distinctly doubtful, and in
-the first test match he was twice no-balled by Charles Bannerman for
-throwing. He had bad luck against us in more than one innings, several
-catches being missed off his bowling. Downes is a splendid trier and a
-plucky, hard-working cricketer who can bowl all day quite cheerfully.
-On a sticky wicket he is bound to be very difficult, and it was on a
-pitch of this sort that he and Fisher dismissed the Australian XI. of
-1896 for less than a hundred runs.
-
-Callaway keeps a very accurate length, and generally makes the ball go
-across with his arm, though, when the wicket helps him, he can bring
-the ball back pretty quickly. Upham and M’Arthy can both make the ball
-break, but they bowl too much at the leg stump, and not enough at the
-off and outside the off stump. Fisher has a good action, but does not
-like being hit, and is, perhaps, rather past his best.
-
-The wicket-keeping all over New Zealand is good—even in the smallest
-places we met a respectable “stumper”—and Boxshall and Williams are
-above the average, both of them being particularly smart on the leg
-side.
-
-In the odds matches our opponents let an unwonted number of catches
-slip through their fingers; but the fielding of the New Zealand XI. was
-decidedly smart in both matches.
-
-The visit of the team undoubtedly did good, and cricket may be expected
-to go ahead rapidly in the next few years. More professional coaches
-from England or Australia are wanted, and greater efforts should be
-made to induce the Australians to send over teams. Lack of funds has in
-the past militated against the spread of cricket; but the New Zealand
-Cricket Council, who engineered the tour, and nearly all the local
-centres, made money out of the gate receipts, and as a keen enthusiasm
-has been aroused, improvement in the future should be rapid.
-
-There were too many matches against odds, and too much travelling and
-rushing about; but we saw New Zealand from end to end, and everywhere
-we were received with the greatest hospitality.
-
-One word more. The loyalty and devotion of my companions made the
-oft-times difficult task of captaincy a joy and a pleasure, and any
-success which may have attended the tour—and I think I may safely say
-it was a success—was due entirely to the support and confidence they
-at all times gave me.
-
-[Illustration:
- _From a Painting attributed to_ _J. J. Chalon, R.A._
-_OLD CHARLTON CHURCH AND MANOR HOUSE._]
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-CHAPTER XVI
-
-CRICKET GROUNDS
-
-By Messrs. SUTTON AND SONS, The King’s Seedsmen, Reading
-
-
-Without wishing to detract from the skill of the many famous batsmen of
-to-day, or venturing to compare them with players of a generation ago,
-it is probable that the former owe some of their success to the perfect
-wickets on which most first-class matches are now played. No apology is
-needed, therefore, for embodying in this work practical notes on the
-formation and maintenance of really good turf.
-
-The soils on which a satisfactory cricket pitch cannot be formed are
-sand and an impervious clay. On the former it is difficult to establish
-a plant of grass, and under rain the latter becomes sticky. But loam
-which has been cultivated, especially when it is slightly tenacious,
-possesses all the qualities which favour the maintenance of fine
-perennial grasses, and at the same time enables the groundsman to
-prepare a firm and true surface.
-
-On sandy soil the grass obtains such a feeble hold that even after rain
-the pitch, as it rapidly dries, crumbles and becomes unreliable. No
-amount of rolling will bind a soil of this quality into a firm surface,
-capable of withstanding the severe wear of a cricket match. Should
-there be no alternative site, it is imperative that sandy soil be
-covered with several inches of stiff loam, inclining to the character
-of clay. When filled with grass roots, such a soil can be rolled down
-into a fast, true, and enduring wicket, and the porous subsoil will
-ensure effectual drainage. The club purse must determine the extent of
-ground to be treated in the manner we recommend, but while the work is
-in progress, it is worth while to strain a point to make the playing
-square sufficiently large—say, at the very least, 40 yards in the line
-of the wickets, by 30 yards in width.
-
-A different course must be adopted with adhesive land which has to be
-rendered porous. Possibly an effectual system of drainage, carried out
-by an expert, may be absolutely necessary; but this is a task which
-should not be undertaken with a light heart. It is a costly business,
-and the trenches take a long time to settle down. After a field has
-been levelled and sown, it is exasperating to see broad lines of soil
-gradually sinking below the general level, to the ruin of the ground
-for one or more seasons. As a rule, a good playing square can be
-established on clay by taking out the soil to about 1 foot in depth
-and replacing it with 6 or 8 inches of mixed chalk and sandy loam. On
-the top, return enough of the original soil, broken very fine, and
-carefully beaten down, to ensure a perfect level,—the surface to be
-finished with the rake and roller. Making up the ground should commence
-in October, and work ought to be completed before the end of November.
-In the absence of frost, February is the month in which the best
-results can be obtained from the heavy roller.
-
-A slope is objectionable in many respects. It restricts the choice
-of a wicket, favours the hitting in one direction, and handicaps the
-bowlers. For these and other reasons, a level is justly regarded as
-one of the conditions from which stern necessity alone can warrant
-departure.
-
-Whether the entire area, or only the playing square, shall be
-efficiently prepared and sown generally resolves itself into a
-question of funds. Where the limitation is unavoidable we need not
-waste arguments. But it must not be forgotten that, however excellent
-the playing square may be, unless the ball can travel evenly to
-the boundary, first-class cricket is impossible. This fact is now
-recognised by comparatively small clubs, whose grounds are laid and
-kept with a precision that would have excited the admiration of
-county teams in years gone by. And the club which is content with a
-well-made centre and an indifferent margin deprives itself of matches
-such as every ardent lover of the game desires to witness. It costs
-comparatively little more to prepare the whole area perfectly, and
-whatever saving may be effected by limiting the outlay for labour or
-for seed to the playing square is almost certain to be repented of.
-
-Apart from the ground, two reserve plots should be sown and kept in
-the same condition as a fine lawn. From these plots turf can be cut to
-mend holes made by bowlers or batsmen. When one plot has been used,
-the surface must be made up with 3 or 4 inches of rich sifted soil,
-entirely free from stones; seed can then be sown and the sward be
-brought into condition while the other plot is cut away. Two or three
-years are necessary to mature the roots into a firm compact mat that
-may be cut, rolled, and relaid on the cricket ground.
-
-Cricket grounds are made either by laying turf or sowing seed. In
-favour of the former method it may be claimed that the ground is at
-once clothed with verdure, and under favourable circumstances the
-ground is sometimes ready for use in rather less time than when seed is
-sown. But the difference is scarcely worth consideration.
-
-Objections to the use of turf are so numerous and important that
-advocates of the practice decrease in number every year.
-
-As a rule, purchased turf abounds in coarse grasses and pernicious
-weeds, which are difficult to eradicate, especially the coarse grasses.
-
-When turf is laid in spring, the sections separate under a hot sun or
-drying wind, and the whole surface is disfigured by ugly seams. The
-gaping fissures have then to be filled with sifted soil and sown with
-seed.
-
-The objection most frequently urged against turf is its almost
-prohibitive cost. When cut to the usual size—3 feet long by 1 foot
-wide—nearly fifteen thousand pieces are required to lay an acre. The
-expense, including cutting, carting, and laying, generally falls but
-little short of £100. For the same area, seed of the highest quality
-can be obtained for about £5, unless for some urgent reason an unusual
-quantity is sown; even then, an increased outlay of 50s. will suffice.
-
-The labour involved in levelling the land and preparing a suitable
-surface is substantially the same for both methods.
-
-A sward produced from a mixture of suitable seeds is incomparably
-superior in quality to the best turf generally obtainable. Seeds
-of fine and other useful grasses are now saved with all the care
-necessary to ensure the perfect purity of each variety. The presence of
-extraneous substances of any kind, and of false seeds in particular,
-can be instantly detected. The percentage of vitality is also
-determined with exactness by severe and reliable tests. The several
-varieties of grasses can therefore be mixed in suitable proportions for
-any soil or purpose with the precision of a physician’s prescription.
-
-
-DRAINAGE
-
-Should draining be necessary, this operation takes precedence of all
-other work in preparing the land. If rain pass freely through the soil,
-leaving no stagnant pools even in wet winters, the sufficiency of the
-natural drainage may be inferred. But it should be clearly understood
-that a fine turf cannot be established on a bog. Sour land soddened
-with moisture, or an impervious clay, must have pipes properly laid
-before good turf is possible, and as the trenches cannot be filled
-so firmly as to prevent the ground from sinking afterwards, draining
-must be completed at least six months before seed is sown. The size
-of the pipes must be determined by the rainfall of the district, the
-distance between the rows by the nature of the soil. The depth need
-not be great, as the roots of grass do not penetrate far into the
-earth. Fifteen feet between the rows, and the pipes three feet below
-the surface, are common measurements. No single drain should be very
-long, and the smaller should enter the larger pipes at an acute angle,
-to avoid arresting the flow of water. Near trees or hedges the sockets
-must be set in cement, or the roots may force admission and choke the
-drain, and the outflow ends should be examined periodically to ensure
-efficient working. In laying the pipes, it is necessary to employ a
-practical man who understands the business, and will consider the
-peculiar requirements of the case.
-
-
-PREPARATORY WORK
-
-When no important alteration of the ground is necessary, deep
-cultivation should be avoided. Spudding to the depth of 6 to 9 inches
-will suffice, and this affords the opportunity of incorporating such
-manure as may be required. It frequently happens, however, that the
-surface does not present the desired conformation, and that a level
-plot can only be obtained by the removal or addition of a considerable
-mass of earth. Possibly the level may have to be raised by soil
-brought from a distance. In such a case it is usual to shoot the loads
-where needed as they arrive, tread the earth firmly down, and make
-the surface even as the work proceeds. This is the proper method if
-the whole bulk of soil come from one source, is uniform in quality,
-and suitable for the seed-bed. But in the event of there being much
-difference in the mould, it will be necessary to spread a layer of each
-kind over the entire plot, putting the retentive soil at the bottom,
-and reserving the finer and more friable portion for the top. To make
-up one part of the ground entirely with loamy clay, and another part
-with light loam, will inevitably result in a patchy appearance, because
-each soil fosters those grasses which possess affinities for it.
-
-In order to ensure a perfectly level surface, pegs must be driven
-into the soil at the extreme points, and intermediate pegs at regular
-distances between. On these a long piece of wood having a straight
-edge can be adjusted by a spirit-level, and by shifting the wooden
-straight-edge from peg to peg, the level of the whole area can be
-efficiently tested.
-
-
-WEED SEEDS IN SOILS
-
-A serious danger to which strange soil is liable is the presence of
-seeds of troublesome weeds. We have seen a lawn which had been made
-level with sifted soil taken from a neighbouring field. Upon every spot
-thus treated a strong colony of _Holcus lanatus_ had grown, and as the
-pale green patches defied all efforts to extirpate them, the extreme
-course of cutting out and replacing with good turf had to be adopted.
-
-The only certain way of ridding soil of weed seeds is to burn it.
-This operation is well understood by agriculturists, and we should
-like to insist upon it as not only essential when adding strange
-soil upon which a cricket ground is to be made, but highly desirable
-whenever the land is a stiff clay, in which case burning is often worth
-undertaking, for the beneficial effect it has on the growth of grass.
-The disintegration of the clay, which is one of the good effects of
-burning, may to some extent be obtained by simply digging up the ground
-in autumn and leaving it rough for the frost to break down and sweeten.
-
-Should the proximity of dwellings render burning impracticable, the
-only alternative as regards the weeds is to allow their seeds plenty of
-time to germinate, and to destroy successive crops by light hoeings
-in dry weather. Of course, waiting for weeds to appear is vexatious
-when the land is prepared and the season is passing away. Still, it
-will prove a real saving both of time and labour to ensure a clean
-seed-bed. After grasses are sown the soil must not be disturbed, and
-atmospheric conditions may follow which retard the germination of
-the grasses, and too often doom the sowing to failure. Those who are
-practically acquainted with gardening know that land which has been
-regularly cultivated for years, and is supposed to be fairly clean,
-always produces a plentiful crop of weeds, although no seed whatever be
-sown, yet many a faultless lot of grass seed has been condemned, when
-the weeds have had their origin entirely in the soil. Delay in sowing
-offers the further advantage that the soil will become thoroughly
-consolidated—a condition which is highly favourable to grasses, and
-very difficult of attainment under hurried preparation.
-
-
-ENRICHING THE SOIL
-
-In preparing the seed-bed, the condition of the soil is too often
-disregarded, although it is a matter of considerable importance, for
-grass is quite as easily starved as any other crop. After the sward
-is established, the enrichment of the soil has to be effected under
-disadvantages to which other crops are not subject. Vegetables in a
-well-ordered garden are changed from plot to plot, so as to tax the
-soil for different constituents, and the ground is frequently manured,
-broken up, and exposed to atmospheric influences, which increase its
-fertility. Grass is a fixed crop, chiefly deriving its nourishment
-from a few inches near the surface, and the only way of refreshing it
-is by raking or harrowing and top-dressing. Hence there are obvious
-reasons for putting the land into good heart before sowing. Well-rotted
-stable manure is always beneficial, but fresh manure should be avoided,
-because of its tendency to make the soil hollow. From twenty to thirty
-cartloads of manure per acre will probably suffice.
-
-Where artificials are more convenient, 2 cwt. of superphosphate
-of lime, 1 cwt. of Peruvian guano, and 2 cwt. of bone dust, mixed
-together, make an excellent dressing. The quantities named are usually
-sufficient for an acre, and the mixture can be evenly spread and worked
-into the soil while the preparation of the seed-bed is in progress.
-Sutton’s lawn manure also contains all the constituents essential to
-the luxuriant growth of fine grasses and clovers. This is a highly
-concentrated artificial, and as a rule not more than 3 cwt. per acre
-will be necessary. After the application of the manure, not less than
-ten days should elapse before sowing the grasses, or some of the
-seed-germs may be destroyed.
-
-
-SURFACE PREPARATION
-
-A fine friable surface is necessary to ensure favourable conditions
-for the seed, and in levelling the ground there must be a diligent
-use of the rake and roller. It is not sufficient to go over the ground
-once with each implement. Repeated raking assists in clearing the land
-of stones, unless they are very numerous, in which case it may be
-necessary to spread 2 or 3 inches of fine rich earth over the surface.
-After every raking the roller should follow, each time in a different
-direction. These operations reveal inequalities, pulverise the soil,
-and impart to it the firmness which favours germination. Grasses,
-particularly the finer varieties, are too fragile to force their way
-through clods, and many seeds will be lost altogether if buried to a
-greater depth than a quarter of an inch.
-
-
-SELECTION OF SEEDS
-
-The selection of grasses and clovers which are to form a fine dense
-sward should be regarded as in the highest degree important. They
-must be permanent in character, adapted to the soil, and free from
-coarse-growing varieties. On land which is liable to burn, clovers
-maintain their verdure under a hot sun after grasses have become brown.
-There is, however, this objection to clovers, that they show signs of
-wear earlier than grasses, and hold moisture longer after a shower.
-It is therefore often advisable to sow grasses only, unless the grass
-is peculiarly liable to scorch in summer. Then it is an open question
-whether an admixture of clovers may be regarded as the lesser of two
-evils.
-
-The following grasses and clovers are specially suited for
-establishing a fine close turf, and the characteristics of the several
-varieties indicate the soil and purpose for which each kind is
-naturally adapted:—
-
-_Cynosurus cristatus_ (Crested Dogstail).—The foliage of this grass
-is dwarf, compact in growth, and possesses the great advantage of
-remaining green for an unusual time in the absence of rain. The roots
-are capable of penetrating the hardest soil, and the plant is well
-adapted for sowing on dry loams, especially such as rest upon a chalky
-subsoil, for which it manifests a marked partiality. Still, it will
-thrive almost anywhere, and should form a prominent constituent of
-most prescriptions for cricket grounds. Crested Dogstail is strictly
-perennial, and will increase in strength and vigour for quite two years
-after it is sown.
-
-_Festuca duriuscula_ (Hard Fescue).—This grass grows freely on sheep
-downs, and when mingled in due proportion with other varieties it
-largely contributes to the formation of a fine close turf. The plant
-commences growing early in spring, and seed should be sown on all soils
-that are not very wet.
-
-_Festuca ovina tenuifolia_ (Fine-leaved Sheep’s Fescue).—The foliage
-of Fine-leaved Sheep’s Fescue maintains its dark green colour for
-some time in hot dry weather, and is so slender as to render the
-term “blades of grass” almost a misnomer. Although most useful in
-mixture with other grasses, a homogeneous turf cannot be obtained from
-Fine-leaved Sheep’s Fescue alone. The plants grow in dense tufts,
-and exhibit a decided antipathy to each other. The roots descend
-to a considerable depth in search of moisture. As a consequence,
-this grass will thrive on sandy or rocky soils that are incapable of
-supporting any other variety. In the early stage of growth it is easily
-overpowered by weeds, and for this reason autumn is preferable to
-spring sowing, because weeds are then less prevalent. But for cricket
-grounds this grass cannot be dispensed with, at whatever time of year a
-sowing may be made. After the plants are established they easily hold
-their position.
-
-_Festuca rubra_ (Red Fescue) possesses many desirable qualities, which
-give it a peculiar value. The foliage is very fine, close-growing,
-endures hard wear, and the plant is not exacting as to habitat. It
-thrives on the driest and poorest soils as well as on the best loams.
-The true variety is quite distinct from either of the other fine-leaved
-Fescues, and pure seed is difficult to obtain.
-
-_Lolium perenne Suttoni_ (Sutton’s Dwarf Perennial Rye Grass).—Most
-of the perennial rye grasses are too coarse for a cricket ground, but
-this variety is eminently suitable for the purpose, alike for the
-fineness of its foliage and the dwarf branching habit of growth. It
-tillers out close to the ground, forms a compact sward, and retains its
-verdure throughout the year, unless burnt by excessive drought, from
-which it speedily recovers. The quick maturity of this grass is another
-advantage, as it occupies the ground while slower-growing varieties are
-developing.
-
-_Poa pratensis_ (Smooth-stalked Meadow Grass).—Although somewhat
-shallow-rooted, this grass endures drought remarkably well. Light land,
-rich in humus, is its favourite resort, and it will also grow, but not
-with the same freedom, on heavy soil. The plant does not develop its
-full proportions in the first season.
-
-_Poa trivialis_ (Rough-stalked Meadow Grass) is somewhat similar in
-appearance to _Poa pratensis_, but instead of being adapted to dry,
-light soils, it flourishes in strong, moist situations, and unless
-the land contains abundance of potash and phosphoric acid, the plant
-speedily disappears.
-
-_Poa nemoralis_ (Wood Meadow Grass).—From the perpetual greenness and
-dwarf close-growing habit of this grass, it is admirably suited for
-cricket grounds. The growth commences very early in spring, and it is
-one of the best grasses for enduring drought.
-
-_Trifolium repens perenne_ (Perennial White Clover) is indigenous all
-over the country, and may be seen growing freely by roadsides; indeed,
-it grows better in poor than in rich land. The seed will lie dormant at
-some depth in the soil, and yet germinate freely when brought to the
-surface. Perennial White is one of the clovers most frequently sown on
-lawns and cricket grounds; when constantly mown and rolled, it produces
-a dense mass of herbage.
-
-_Trifolium minus_ (Yellow Suckling Clover).—This is a quick-growing
-plant, showing abundantly in summer, just when the grasses are thin and
-the dense foliage of clover is most welcome.
-
-
-QUANTITY OF SEED
-
-We need scarcely allude to the necessity of sowing new and pure seed,
-strong in germinating power. Seeds of the grasses and clovers suitable
-for producing a fine turf are nearly all expensive, some of them very
-expensive. But as fine grasses do not tiller out to the same extent
-as the larger pasture varieties, a liberal seeding is imperative. We
-recommend a sowing of four bushels per acre, and should the ground be
-wanted in the shortest possible time, the quantity may with advantage
-be increased to five or six bushels per acre. The additional outlay
-will be well repaid by the rapid clothing of the ground; and in favour
-of thick seeding it may be urged that the more closely the plants are
-crowded the finer will be the herbage.
-
-
-SOWING
-
-Grass seeds may be sown at any time between the middle of March and
-the end of September. But from the latter half of May on to about the
-second week in August, hot, dry weather often proves destructive to
-the young plants. They cannot acquire sufficient stamina to endure
-continued drought or fierce heat, unless constant watering is possible,
-and it is not conducive to sweetness of temper to see a good plant
-wither away. From the middle of March to the first week of May is the
-best period for spring sowing, the earlier the better; and from about
-10th August to the middle of September for summer or autumn sowing.
-The clovers from an autumn sowing are liable to destruction by a severe
-winter, even if slugs spare them. Should there be failure from any
-cause, seed must be sown in the following spring.
-
-The seeds can be more evenly distributed by two sowings than by one,
-however skilled and practised the sower may be; and the second sowing
-should cross the first at right angles. The finer grass seeds, being
-small and light, are readily blown to a distance by a high wind; a
-quiet time should therefore be chosen, and the workman must keep his
-hand low. On large plots the seed-barrow can be used with advantage,
-but even here we recommend two sowings, instead of entrusting all the
-seed to a single operation. Where the work of preparing the ground has
-been continuous, seed may be sown immediately the bed is ready. The
-whole plot must then be lightly raked once more, with the object of
-covering as many seeds as possible. Those which are deeply buried will
-not germinate, and those which are exposed may be scorched by the sun,
-or consumed by birds. As a finish put the roller over twice, first
-north and south, then east and west, and it must be done carefully, for
-on every spot missed by the roller the grasses will fail. Good work
-will leave the surface almost as smooth and true as a billiard table.
-
-It frequently happens that the preparation of the seed-bed is completed
-in advance of the proper time for sowing, and the plot is allowed to
-lie fallow. In such cases, through the fall of rain, or some other
-cause, the surface becomes set, and it is necessary to break the top
-crust into a fine friable condition before the seed can be sown with a
-fair prospect of success.
-
-
-WORM-CASTS
-
-In a very short time a thick sprinkling of worm-casts will be observed.
-We have no desire to call in question the general service rendered by
-these lowly creatures, but their movements in ground newly sown for a
-lawn or cricket ground are unquestionably mischievous, and the injury
-they cause will be greater in proportion to the looseness of the soil.
-A well-made, firm seed-bed is less liable to injury than one that has
-not been properly consolidated by the roller. Upon old turf the cast is
-thrown up from a well-defined orifice seldom exceeding a quarter of an
-inch in diameter. Worms loosen the soil of a newly-made seed-bed for a
-considerable distance round each burrow, and on this broken earth not a
-seed will germinate. It would be comparatively unimportant if the casts
-were few and far between, but generally hundreds of them may be seen on
-a pole of ground.
-
-When and how the casts should be dealt with is sometimes a source of
-perplexity. A few days after sowing, a light roller will gather them
-up, if moist, and the implement must be scraped at the end of every
-run. When the casts are dry, the roller will crush them and remain
-clean. This light rolling may be repeated once or twice, if necessary,
-always taking care not to break the surface either with the foot or
-the roller. After the first fine spears of grass begin to show, it is
-generally unwise to touch the bed until the scythe or mower comes into
-use.
-
-Those who care to rid the soil of worms, either before sowing or
-after the grass is established, may do so by means of water strongly
-impregnated with newly-burned lime. Fill a barrel with water, add
-as much lime as the water will absorb, stir briskly, and then allow
-the lime to settle. The clear fluid, freely used from an ordinary
-water-can, will bring the worms from their burrows in hundreds, and
-at the same time benefit the grass. The worms should be collected and
-destroyed in salt water.
-
-
-WATER AND SHADE
-
-When severe and prolonged drought succeeds the sowing, there is a
-possibility that the seeds may be “malted.” In spring the soil is
-generally moist enough to start seed-germs, but during continued dry
-weather growth is arrested, and the fragile seedlings wither away.
-As a rule, the watering of newly-sown land is to be avoided, but it
-may become a necessity if the grass is to be saved. A small plot can
-easily be watered by hose, or even by the water-can fitted with a fine
-rose. A large area presents difficulties, especially in the absence of
-hose, or if water has to be carried a considerable distance. In any
-case there must be no rude trampling on the soil. Flat boards laid at
-intervals, and ordinary care, will prevent injury from the traffic. The
-water must be delivered in a fine spray, and for a sufficient time to
-prevent the necessity of a second application. Still, watering is an
-evil at best, and one means of avoiding it altogether is to cover the
-entire surface, immediately after sowing, with a thin layer of cocoanut
-fibre, which will screen the soil from burning sunshine, check rapid
-evaporation, and foster the slender blades of grass as they rise. There
-is no occasion to remove this slight protection, for it will prove an
-advantage long after the grass has grown through it. To some extent the
-fibre is also a defence against the depredations of birds.
-
-[Illustration: _CRICKET’S PEACEFUL WEAPONS._]
-
-[Illustration: _THE END OF THE INNINGS._
-(_WILLIAM BELDHAM, b. 1766, d. 1862_)]
-
-
-BIRD SCARES
-
-Sparrows and several of the finches are particularly partial to grass
-seeds, and they do mischief in other ways. The birds break up the
-surface, eat until surfeited, and then take a dust-bath. There are many
-methods of scaring them, and some plan must be adopted to preserve the
-seed from these marauders.
-
-Small plots can be protected by nets, but on a large scale this mode
-of defence is, of course, out of the question. One cheap scare is to
-connect lengths of twine to tall stakes, and at intervals hang strips
-of glittering tin, slightly twisted, in order that they may be freely
-turned by the wind. Another remedy is to make an example of some of
-the pirates, and hang them up as a warning. When the sown area is
-extensive, it should be watched by a lad until the plant appears. He
-must be an early riser, and if it will not prove a nuisance, he may be
-entrusted with a gun and a few blank cartridges.
-
-
-MOWING
-
-While the plant is quite young, it should be topped with a sharp
-scythe. This will encourage the grasses to tiller out and their
-roots to fill the soil. At brief intervals the cutting should be
-repeated, and for this early work on the tender grass the scythe is
-unquestionably preferable to the mowing machine. Indeed, the risk of
-injury from the mower is so great that many practical men condemn its
-employment until the plant is fairly established. But the condition of
-the machine must be taken into account. We have successfully used a
-mower for the very first cutting, having previously ascertained by a
-trial on old grass that the cutters were in perfect order.
-
-In the judicious use of the mower lies one secret of a close sward.
-During severe winter weather the implement may not be wanted for
-several weeks, but as spring advances the ragged plant should have
-attention, and the necessity for more frequent cutting will be evident,
-until in warm, moist weather, twice a week, and possibly, for a brief
-period, every other day, may not be too often. No rigid law can be laid
-down on this point. The grass should never wear a neglected appearance,
-nor should the work on any account be postponed to a more convenient
-season. Setting the mower requires the exercise of judgment. It
-should never be so low as to graze the surface, and in summer, during
-scorching sunshine, it will be advisable to raise the cutter a trifle
-higher than for strong spring growth.
-
-
-ROLLING
-
-Next in importance to mowing comes the use of the roller, without which
-it is impossible to establish a fine close turf, or to maintain it in
-high condition. After the first cutting of the young grass, the whole
-plot must be gently compressed with a rather light roller, and the
-work needs care, because the bed is easily broken by a clumsy foot.
-Subsequent cuttings to be followed by the roller until the plant is
-capable of bearing a heavier implement, which should not always be used
-in the same direction.
-
-When the soil becomes hard through dry weather, rolling can do no good,
-and during frost it will be injurious; but in spring and autumn the
-frequent use of a rather heavy roller will have a visibly beneficial
-effect on the grass.
-
-The best rollers are constructed with two cylinders, having the outer
-edges rounded. The division of the cylinder facilitates turning, and
-the rounded edges prevent unsightly marks.
-
-
-DESTRUCTION OF WEEDS
-
-After the most careful preparation of the land, annual weeds are
-certain to appear, and every weed, if left alone, will choke a number
-of the surrounding grasses. Frequent mowing checks these weeds, but
-plantains, thistles, and dandelions must be taken up, each one singly,
-about an inch below the surface. A pinch of salt dropped upon the cut
-root will effectually prevent new growth. The lad who does this work
-should understand what he is about, for a plantain merely cut off below
-the collar will send out half-a-dozen shoots, in the same manner as sea
-kale, and prove a greater nuisance than the original crown; and the
-careless use of salt will kill a lot of grass plants. Daisies should be
-lifted separately, each plant with its root entire, and although new
-growth will here and there appear for a second or even a third time,
-the daisies will be weaker, and a little perseverance will speedily
-rid a large grass plot of every one of them. Another efficient mode of
-eradicating weeds is to dip a wood skewer into sulphuric acid, strong
-carbolic acid, or one of the liquid weed destroyers, and then plunge
-the skewer perpendicularly into the heart of the plant. The result
-is deadly and instantaneous; but the use of these destructive fluids
-needs great care to avoid personal injury or the burning of holes in
-clothing. The bottle containing the liquid must be kept in a place of
-security.
-
-In extirpating weeds there is nothing like system. Instead of aimlessly
-wandering hither and thither, it is more economical in time and labour
-to mark off with a garden line a strip six feet wide, and clear the
-weeds from the enclosure. Follow with successive strips until the whole
-surface has been dealt with, and it is surprising how quickly a large
-area may be divested of weeds.
-
-After sowing grass seeds, how soon will the ground be fit for use?
-is a question frequently asked. No definite answer can be given. The
-time depends on the period of the year, the weather which follows
-the sowing, and the attention bestowed on the rising plant. To these
-influences must be added the nature of the soil, aspect, and district.
-In August or early September, sowing should produce, under favourable
-circumstances, and with generous treatment, a good turf during
-the following summer. Spring sowings are specially subject to the
-vicissitudes of the season. When the atmosphere is genial and the plot
-receives due attention, the plant rapidly fills the soil, and a thick
-sward results towards the end of July or the beginning of August. But
-it is desirable not to subject it to hard use until the following year.
-
-Except the final mowing and light rolling on the morning of the match,
-wickets should be prepared three days in advance. It is often fatal to
-good cricket to employ the heavy roller on the day the match commences.
-Should the grass be so dense as to make the wicket slow, a broom deftly
-used, followed by a hand mower, run several times between the wickets
-and across the ground also, will affect a marked improvement in the
-pace. The preparation can be finished with the small roller.
-
-Plantains should never be tolerated on a cricket ground. When the ball
-happens to fall on the centre of one of these plants, it may travel in
-the most erratic manner.
-
-Many cricket grounds are grazed with sheep, and if the animals are
-at the same time fed with cake, this is one of the simplest and most
-effectual means of maintaining the sward in a luxuriant condition. But
-we have seen sheep do immense mischief on light sandy ground, where
-their quick snatching mode of feeding readily uproots the plants. Of
-course the work of mowing is greatly reduced when sheep can with safety
-be allowed to graze. It must, however, be distinctly understood that
-without cake the sheep add nothing to the fertility of the soil.
-
-
-IMPROVING CRICKET GROUNDS
-
-As a rule, every cricket ground should be liberally manured in spring,
-with the artificials as recommended above; and before or at the close
-of each season—certainly not later than the middle of September—fine
-grass seeds should be sown over the worn parts of the turf. If the
-sowing can be made early in September, the grasses will have several
-months in which to become established, and for this reason sowing in
-autumn on a cricket ground is generally preferable to sowing in spring.
-
-As a preliminary, the surface must be raked or harrowed to provide
-a seed-bed. Then sow renovating seeds at the rate of not less than
-one bushel per acre, making two operations of the work to ensure
-regular distribution. Rake or harrow in the seeds to cover as many as
-possible, and finish with a careful rolling.
-
-Newly-made cricket grounds sometimes show depressions after the grass
-is up. Where these are shallow, an occasional sifting of fine loam may
-follow the mowing, and with patient attention a true surface can be
-restored; but a quantity of soil, roughly thrown down, will smother
-the rising plant. Should the hollows be deep, a different procedure
-becomes necessary. Young grass cannot be cut and rolled in the manner
-usual with an established sward, and if holes are filled with a thick
-covering of earth, it is necessary to re-sow and follow with the mower
-and roller, as already advised. But if the plant is fairly thick, it
-may perhaps be possible to cut the young turf in small square sections,
-and lift each one separately by means of a thin flat board or piece of
-zinc. After making good the level, the pieces of turf can, with care,
-be restored without much injury. As a finish, lightly touch the surface
-with the flat beater, and spray over it two or three cans of water.
-
-Inequalities in old turf can be remedied by a simpler mode of
-treatment. Across the hollow spot, cut strips 10 or 12 inches wide,
-and roll back the sward from the centre. Make the bed perfectly level,
-leaving the soil with a firm but crumbled surface; then restore the
-turf, which will be found rather too long for the space, and tenderly
-compress it into the original position; beat carefully down, give a
-soaking of water, and in due time mow and roll. In a few days no trace
-of the operation will be visible, but the grass ought not to be roughly
-used until it is thoroughly re-established.
-
-Fairy rings are sometimes troublesome. They are caused by several kinds
-of fungus. When these decay, the soil becomes charged with nitrogenous
-matter, and a dark green spot of grass is the result. The mycelium
-exhausts the soil of the constituents which are essential to the
-existence of the fungi, and as new supplies of food can only be found
-on fresh ground, the spot becomes a circle, which annually increases in
-circumference, until it either breaks up or the fungi are exhausted.
-No direct remedy is known, but it has been observed that lawns which
-are liberally dressed every spring with stimulating manure produce
-dark green herbage, closely resembling the fairy rings in colour. As
-a consequence the circles are less conspicuous, and they also show a
-tendency to disappear under the effects of the manure.
-
-Moss is generally a sign of poorness of soil, and sometimes indicates
-the need of drainage. But before laying in drain-pipes remedial
-measures should be tried, especially as the work of draining sadly cuts
-the place about. There may also be a difficulty as to the disposal of
-the outflow. To improve the grass, either put the rake heavily over the
-sward, or employ a toothed harrow to drag out as much moss as possible.
-Then spread over the turf a compost, previously prepared, of lime mixed
-with rich soil free from weeds, in the proportion of one load of lime
-to four loads of soil; the addition of Sutton’s lawn manure, at the
-rate of 2 cwt. per acre, will stimulate the grass. Eight cartloads of
-the compost should be applied per acre. About a fortnight after the
-dressing has been spread, a sowing of seed will quickly fill the ground
-with young healthy plants, and assist in preventing a reappearance of
-the moss. The early part of September should be chosen for this work,
-to give the turf time to recover before the next season.
-
-
-
-
- INDEX
-
-
- Abel, 215, 245, 246, 268, 395
-
- Absalom, Mr. C. A., 308, 309
-
- Acland-Hood, H., 358
-
- Adelaide, 235, 252, 253, 261, 286
-
- Alcock, Mr. C. H., 321
-
- —— Mr. C. W., 353, 363
-
- Alexander, 236
-
- All England Eleven, the, 158
-
- Allan, 222
-
- Alverstone, Lord, 363
-
- Amateurs and professionals, 147;
- definition of the term, 193;
- distinction in cricket almost disappeared, 194;
- a comparison made, 196;
- the amateur forty years ago, 196;
- the amateur to-day, 198, 201;
- the professional of old, 198;
- the modern professional, 199;
- the life of a professional, 200;
- second-rate professionals, 200;
- “leagues,” 200;
- providing livelihoods for amateurs, 202;
- complimentary matches and benefits, 203, 207;
- amateurs’ expenses, 203;
- the question in Australia, 204;
- the Australian system, 206;
- gate money, 207;
- professional and amateur play, 208;
- bowling, 208, 209;
- batting, 212;
- fielding, 213;
- the professional wicket-keeper, 213;
- managing a side, 215, 366, 382, 383;
- black professionals, 385
-
- America, cricket in, 389;
- Philadelphia, 390, 393;
- the Philadelphian eleven, 390;
- P. F. Warner’s first tour in, 390;
- his second tour, 390;
- visit of K. S. Ranjitsinhji’s eleven, 391;
- visit of Mr. B. J. T. Bosanquet’s eleven, 391;
- New York, 392;
- Canada, 392
-
- Anson, Mr. T. A., 175, 304
-
- Answorth, J. L., 390
-
- Appleby, Mr., 209, 212
-
- Archer, Mr. A. S., 352
-
- Armstrong, the Australian, 64, 286, 287
-
- Askwith, Mr. G. R., 358
-
- Attewell, 105, 239, 243, 245
-
- Auckland, 381, 410, 411
-
- Australian cricket. _See_ Cricket
-
- Authentics Cricket Club, the, 357, 358
-
- Aylward, 8, 15, 32
-
-
- _Badminton Magazine_, the, 314
-
- Bails, 35
-
- Bainbridge, Mr. H. W., 322, 323
-
- Baldwin, Mr. Lorraine, 349
-
- Balls, cricket, 10
-
- Baltimore, 389
-
- Bannerman, A., 195, 204, 220, 224, 231, 234, 245, 247
-
- —— Charles, 195, 204, 224, 413
-
- Barbados, 385, 386, 387, 388
-
- Bardswell, 334
-
- Barlow, 230, 234, 238
-
- Barnes, 89, 112, 212, 213, 238, 239, 284, 285, 286
-
- Barrett, 244
-
- Base-ball, 390
-
- Bateman, A. E., 307
-
- Bates, 213, 230, 232, 234, 239
-
- Bathurst, Sir Francis, 305
-
- —— L. C. U., 394
-
- Bats, first form of, 4, 5;
- fashion changed, 5, 6, 36;
- limitation of width, 10, 33;
- instruments of defence, 37;
- suitable to young cricketers, 50
-
- Batting, 30;
- necessity of early practice and good coaching, 48;
- a good wicket the first essential, 49;
- hints to beginners, 49;
- a suitable bat, 50;
- position at the wicket, 50;
- where the weight should fall, 51;
- forward play, 53-58;
- the secret of forward play, 53, 54;
- how to play a good length ball, 53, 54;
- the off drive, 54, 55, 57;
- the “half-cock” stroke, 56;
- the forcing forward stroke, 57;
- offensive forward play, 57;
- back play, 58-63;
- moving the right leg, 58, 59;
- the golden rule for back play, 60;
- a good rule on a sticky wicket, 61;
- the hook stroke, 62;
- the back glance, 63;
- the forward glance, 63, 64;
- the leg hit, 64;
- the square leg hit, 64;
- the pull, 65;
- the straight half volley, 66;
- how to drive, 66;
- the on-drive, 67;
- the three classes of cut, 67;
- the forward cut, 67;
- the square cut, 68;
- the late cut, 68;
- the “chop,” 69;
- when to play forward, 69;
- how to play to fast and slow bowling, 70;
- jumping out to hit, 70;
- playing lobs, 70;
- the “hitting or long-handle game,” 71;
- playing on a sticky wicket, 72;
- running, 73-76;
- want of confidence, 75;
- superstitions, 75, 76;
- enthusiasm in cricket, 77
-
- Beauclerk, Lord Frederick, 19, 22, 28
-
- Beginners, hints to, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 84
-
- Belcher, Mr. T. H., 312
-
- Beldham, 13, 19, 22, 28, 40, 172;
- quoted, 14, 15, 21, 22, 30, 38, 39, 40, 44
-
- Bentley, 14, 16, 22
-
- Berkeley, Mr. G. F. H., 331
-
- Betting on cricket, influence of, 11, 13;
- single-wicket matches, 21;
- “leg-work,” 22;
- selling matches, 23;
- Beldham on betting, 24, 25, 153
-
- Beverley Club, 349
-
- Bignall, 214
-
- Birmingham, 279
-
- Bisset, Mr. Murray, 402, 404
-
- Blackham, 220, 223, 231, 234, 257
-
- Bland, James, 21, 23
-
- Bligh, the Hon. Ivo, 317
-
- Block-hole, the, 31, 32
-
- Blore, Mr. E. W., 304
-
- Blythe, 69, 284, 285
-
- Board, J. H., 127, 173, 273, 396
-
- Bonnor, G. J., 228, 231, 234, 321, 354
-
- Booth, Mr. Clement, 307, 308
-
- Bosanquet, Mr. B. J. T., 336, 360, 390, 391, 410
-
- Bourne, Mr. A., 311
-
- Bowling, 30;
- advantages of, 80, 81;
- lob bowlers, 84;
- slow bowlers, 85, 86;
- Nepean, 87;
- C. M. Wells, 88;
- his fast ball, 89;
- delivery, 90;
- holding the ball, 90-91;
- C. L. Townsend, 92;
- Johnny Briggs, 93;
- Peel, 95, 96;
- Rhodes, 96;
- Wainwright, 98;
- Trott, 99;
- Tyler, 100;
- leg-break bowlers, 101;
- medium bowlers, 101, 102;
- George Lohmann, 102;
- description of Lohmann’s bowling by C. B. Fry, 103;
- Jack Hearne, 105;
- Attewell and Mead, 105;
- Hallam, 106;
- Alfred Shaw, 106;
- George Davidson, 107;
- Tate, 107;
- F. S. Jackson, 108;
- R. F. Mason, 108;
- fast bowlers—Tom Richardson, 109, 110;
- Lockwood, 110;
- exhibition of fast bowling at the Oval, 111;
- Arthur Mold, 112;
- George Hirst, 113;
- Sam Woods, 113, 114;
- W. M. Bradley, 115;
- “lobsters,” 115, 116;
- great difference between professional and amateur, 208, 209
-
- Bowls, the game of, 33
-
- Boxshall, 414
-
- Boyle, 222, 224 231, 234, 238
-
- Bradley, W. M., 57, 115, 176, 209, 281, 360
-
- Brain, Mr. J. H., 346, 358
-
- —— W. H., 328
-
- Braund, 64, 101, 214, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 405
-
- —— Mr., 27
-
- Bray, Mr. E. H., 332, 334
-
- Briggs, Johnny, 93, 94, 106, 178, 240, 242, 243, 245, 251, 253, 255,
- 256, 257, 258, 259, 263, 273, 276, 281
-
- Britton-Holmes, Everard, 358
-
- Broadhalfpenny, 20
-
- Brockwell, W., 251, 256, 257, 258, 260, 264
-
- Brown, J. T., 251, 253, 256, 258, 264, 265, 269
-
- Brown, 20, 22
-
- Bruce, W., 240, 245, 260
-
- Buchanan, David, 210, 211, 212, 305
-
- Buckland, E. H., 324
-
- —— Mr. F. M., 315
-
- Budd, Mr., 22, 27, 39
-
- Bull, F. G., 389
-
- Bullingdon Club, the, 299, 302
-
- Bullock, W. H., 304
-
- Buluwayo, 381, 397, 405
-
- Burnup, C. J., 73, 176, 332, 334, 390, 410
-
- Burton, 387
-
- Bury, W., 308
-
- Bush, J. A., 172
-
- Butler, Mr. S. E., 312
-
-
- Caffyn, W., 218, 362
-
- Callaway, 412, 413
-
- Cam, the, 296
-
- Cambridge, 232, 296, 298, 302, 305, 307, 319, 325, 327, 333, 357, 359
-
- Cambridgeshire, 160
-
- Canada, cricket in, 381, 392
-
- Canterbury Week, 355
-
- Cape Colony, 402
-
- Cape Town, 396, 398, 401, 402, 407
-
- Carpenter, 160, 199
-
- Case, Professor, 306, 359
-
- Case, T. B., 357
-
- Cazenove, Mr. Arthur, 304
-
- Charlton, 244
-
- Chatterton, 170
-
- Clarke, P. H., 390, 391
-
- Clarke, 22
-
- Cliftonians, Old, 355
-
- Climate, influence of, on cricket, 221, 222, 387
-
- Cobb, M. R., 392
-
- Cobbold, P. W., 334
-
- Cobden, Mr. F. C., 310, 311
-
- Cobham, Lord, 307
-
- Coningham, 259
-
- Cooper, W. H., 236
-
- Coronation Match, 21
-
- Cotterill, G. E., 307
-
- Cowley Common, 299
-
- —— Marsh, 302
-
- Cranfield of Somerset, 69
-
- Crawford, Frank, 81
-
- Crawford, Mr., 203 note
-
- Crawford, Mr. V. F. S., 391
-
- Crawley, Mr. Eustace, 311, 324
-
- Crawte, 15
-
-
- Cricket, the beginning of, 1;
- origin of name, 1, 2;
- first form of play, 2, 3, 31;
- underhand bowling, 3;
- the first bat, 4, 5;
- choosing the wicket, 4;
- “length” bowling, 4, 5, 32;
- laws in 1774, 5;
- match between Kent County and All England in 1847, 5, 6;
- change of fashion in bat, 6;
- match between Hambledon Club and All England in 1775, 6;
- number of stumps increased, 7, 8;
- height of stumps and narrowing of wicket, 7, 8;
- distance between the wickets, 8, 9;
- regarding the width of the bat and size of ball, 10;
- invention of gauge, 10;
- laws first committed to writing, 11;
- influence of betting, 11, 13;
- a new moral epoch in 1833, 13;
- the Hambledon Club, 13, 14;
- a fire at the M.C.C. Pavilion, 14;
- Farnham the cradle of, 14, 15;
- county “boundaries,” 15;
- famous battlefields, 16;
- early matches, 17;
- cricket in the north, 17;
- appearance of Essex and Herts, 18;
- the first Gents _v._ Players match in 1798, 19;
- more strict division of counties, 20;
- betting, 21-28;
- single-wicket matches, 27, 28
-
- Cricket, country-house, 342;
- the prime of, 343;
- perceptible decrease in the amount of this class of cricket, 344;
- obstacles in the way of, 345;
- the task of collecting a team, 345, 346;
- an ideal week of, 346;
- the ladies’ cricket match, 347;
- lunches, 347;
- Smokers _v._ Non-Smokers, 348;
- the I Zingari Club, 348, 349;
- a batch of anecdotes, 349-354;
- “military weeks,” 354;
- school tours, 355;
- clubs, 355-359;
- aims of, 360
-
- —— county, 20;
- progress of, 139;
- organisation into a formal competition, 141;
- growth and systematisation, 142;
- gate money, 142, 143;
- increase of cricket, due to the growth of county cricket, 144;
- formation of a county Eleven, 144, 145;
- grounds, 146;
- professional players, 147;
- amateurs, 147;
- relations between professionals and amateurs, 149;
- question of residential qualification, 149-152;
- _bona-fide_ residence, 150;
- early county cricket, 152;
- betting, 153;
- some early matches, 154;
- in the north, 155;
- notes on the early half of the century, 156, 157;
- a trio of matches between Sussex and England, 156;
- wides and no-balls, 156;
- arrangement of matches, 157;
- establishment and formation of county clubs, 158, 159;
- the All England and United All England Elevens, 158-160;
- classification of counties, 160, 161, 167, 168;
- arrangement of meetings, 161;
- rivalry of clubs, 161, 162;
- the Challenge Cup offered by the M.C.C., 162;
- list of the champion counties, 163;
- system of reckoning the order, 164;
- connection between the Marylebone Club and the counties, 165, 166;
- history of the various first-class counties, 169-192
-
- Cricket, earlier Australian, the first English teams to visit
- Australia, 217, 218;
- first Australian team to visit England, 218;
- match against Marylebone, 219;
- the 1878 Eleven, 219;
- Spofforth, 220;
- his early methods, 221;
- wicket-keepers and fielders, 222;
- visit of Lord Harris’s Eleven in 1870, 224;
- the second Australian Eleven, 225;
- Palmer, 225, 226;
- Macdonnell, 226, 227;
- match against picked England Eleven, 229;
- visit of Alfred Shaw’s Eleven in 1881, 230;
- the Australian Eleven of 1882, 230;
- decline of form from 1884-1894, 231;
- visit of Earl Darnley’s team to Australia in 1882, 232-234;
- difficulties of touring, 235;
- the cricket grounds, 235;
- the Australian Eleven of 1884, 236, 237;
- Australian cricket at its highest point, 238;
- an English Eleven under Alfred Shaw visits Australia, 239;
- the Australian Eleven of 1886, 239;
- signs of deterioration visible, 240-241;
- visit of professionals to Australia under Shaw and Shrewsbury, 242;
- teams under G. F. Vernon and Shrewsbury visit Australia in 1887-88,
- 242;
- the Australian Eleven of 1890, 243, 244;
- visit of Lord Sheffield’s Eleven to Australia, 1891-92, 245;
- Australian Eleven of 1893, 246;
- the English representatives, 247;
- influence of the interchange of visits on English cricket, 249
-
- Cricket, English and Australian from 1894-1902, 251;
- visit of Mr. Stoddart’s team to Australia, 1894, 251;
- match at Adelaide, 252;
- at Melbourne, 254;
- match with New South Wales, 255;
- with Queensland, 256;
- the first test at Sydney, 256-259;
- second test match at Melbourne, 259;
- third test match at Adelaide, 261;
- fourth test match at Sydney, 261;
- the final test game at Melbourne, 263;
- visit of the Australians to England in 1896, 265;
- H. Trott as captain, 266;
- the first test match at Lord’s, 268;
- the second test match at Manchester, 269;
- the deciding match at the Oval, 271;
- increased pay for professionals, 273;
- visit of A. E. Stoddart’s second team to Australia, 273;
- postponement of the first test at Sydney, 273;
- the second test match at Melbourne, 275;
- the third test match at Adelaide, 276;
- the fourth test match at Melbourne, 277;
- the last test, 278;
- visit of Darling’s team to England, 279;
- the first test at Birmingham, 279;
- the second test at Lord’s, 280;
- the third test at Leeds, 281;
- the fourth test at Manchester, 281;
- the fifth test at the Oval, 282;
- visit of Maclaren’s team to Australia, 284;
- the first test at Sydney, 284;
- the second test at Melbourne, 285;
- the third test at Adelaide, 286;
- the fourth test at Sydney, 287;
- the last match at Melbourne, 287;
- visit of Joe Darling’s team in 1902, 288;
- the test matches, 292;
- the test at Birmingham, 292;
- the test match at Lord’s, 293;
- test match at Manchester, 294
-
- —— foreign, 381;
- tours abroad, 381;
- the financial question, 382;
- the West Indies, 383-389;
- America, 389-393;
- Portugal, 393;
- South Africa, 396-408;
- New Zealand, 409-414
-
- Cricket, University, 296;
- the University match, 297-298;
- trial grounds, 299;
- Oxford, 299;
- Cambridge, 300;
- early history of, 301;
- cricket “families,” 303;
- the Dark Blues, 302-304;
- the Light Blues, 304, 305;
- the mid-Victorian section of, 307;
- a remarkable group of Cambridge players, 308;
- “Bill of the Play,” 309;
- the match of 1870, 310;
- triumph of Oxford in 1875, 313;
- a close finish, 314;
- the ability of the Cambridge Eleven of 1878, 315;
- Mr. Edward Lyttelton’s team, 316;
- the teams in 1881, 319;
- treatment by the great Australian team of 1882, 320;
- Cambridge Past and Present _v._ Australia, 321;
- the ‘Varsity match in 1883, 322;
- comparative falling off of the Universities, 322;
- the Cambridge victory of 1885, 323;
- “the last choice game,” 324;
- the difficulty of getting a “blue,” 327;
- Cambridge _v._ Sussex, 327;
- incidents leading to an alteration in the law of following on, 327;
- new players, 329;
- the ‘Varsity match of 1896, 332;
- ebb years between 1896-1902, 335;
- a gorgeous piece of cricket, 335;
- undergraduates, 336;
- contemporary Oxford, 336;
- Cambridge, 337;
- list of those who have represented England in the test matches at
- home, 338;
- programme of each season, 339;
- importance of the University match to the funds of the M.C.C., 340
-
- —— village, “Yokels at Cricket,” 361;
- village cricket _v._ county cricket, 364;
- a village match, 365;
- educational value of, 365, 366;
- our Club, 366;
- the ground, 367;
- the pitch, 367;
- the pavilion, 367;
- the tea tent, 368;
- officials, members, and subscription, 368, 369;
- the committee, 370;
- the best village cricketers, 370;
- the question of finance, 371, 372;
- details of expenditure, 373;
- country umpires, 375, 376;
- the great annual event, 377, 378, 379
-
- Cricketing, early developments in the art of, 29;
- effect of bowling and batting on each other, 30;
- excellence of the Australian game, 30;
- advance in batting due to advance in bowling, 30, 31;
- “bias” bowling, 33, 34;
- change in the height of wickets, 35;
- length bowling introduced, 35;
- alteration of the form of bat, 36;
- real beginning of cricket, 36;
- aggressive tactics of early cricketers, 37, 38;
- “slogging,” 38;
- style of batting before 1780, 39;
- a new era in the art of batting, 39;
- Tom Walker, 40, 41;
- “throwing-bowling,” 41;
- Harris’s bowling, 41, 42;
- mode of delivering the ball, 42, 43;
- rising tendency of his balls, 43;
- effect of his bowling on the batting, 44;
- hitting out, 45;
- development of forward defensive play, 47
-
- Cricket Council, the, 167, 168
-
- Crockford, 23
-
- Cumberbatch, 384
-
- Cunliffe, Mr. F. H. E., 332, 333
-
- Cuttell, 106, 396, 402, 404, 406
-
-
- Daft, Richard, 206, 211, 215
-
- Dale, J. W., 309, 310
-
- Daniel, A. W. T., 308
-
- Darling, J., 253, 257, 263, 264, 266, 268, 272, 275, 276, 278, 279,
- 282
-
- Darnley, Lord, 300, 317
-
- Davenport, H. R. Bromley, 394
-
- Davidson, George, 107, 170
-
- Day, Mr. S. H., 337
-
- Demerara, 385, 386, 387
-
- Denton, 73
-
- Derbyshire, 158, 168, 169, 201
-
- Dillon, 364
-
- Douglas, Mr. R. N., 326, 327, 357, 394
-
- —— J., 329, 357
-
- Downes, 412, 413
-
- Dowson, Mr. E. M., 69, 337, 360, 391, 410
-
- Drake, Mr. E. T., 305
-
- Druce, Mr. N. F., 273, 313, 330, 333, 335
-
- —— Mr. W. G., 330
-
- —— Mr. W. E., 76
-
- Duff, 285, 286
-
- Durham, 160
-
-
- Emmett, Tom, 54, 215, 224, 230
-
- Essex, 18, 158, 168, 171, 308
-
- Eton, 304
-
- —— Ramblers, 355
-
- Evans, Mr. A. H., 224, 233, 239, 303, 305, 316, 319
-
- —— Mr. W. H. B., 337
-
- Evershed, S. H., 170
-
-
- Fane, F. L., 410
-
- Fane, Sir Spencer Ponsonby, 349
-
- Farnham, 20
-
- Fawcett, E. B., 307
-
- Fellowes, Mr. Walter, 304
-
- —— Mr. Harvey, 303, 304
-
- Fenner, F. P., 300
-
- Fennex, 44
-
- Ferris, 109, 242, 244, 245
-
- Fielding, 39, 117;
- deterioration of, lately, 118;
- importance of, 119;
- how to obtain practice, 119;
- throwing at the wicket, 120;
- ground fielding, 120;
- returning the ball, 120;
- pursuing the ball, 121;
- speed and accuracy in returning the ball, 122;
- running men out, 122;
- anticipating the batsman’s stroke, 123;
- backing up the wicket-keeper and bowler, 123, 124;
- position of hands for catch, 124;
- improvement of wicket-keeping, 125;
- duties of a good keeper, 125, 126;
- position of hands, 127;
- the “give,” 127;
- taking balls on the leg side, 128;
- point, 128;
- “cover point,” 129;
- position, 129;
- judging catches, 130;
- Gregory at “cover,” 130;
- duties of “third” man, 131;
- the “slips,” 132;
- “mid-off,” 133;
- “mid-on,” 133;
- position of short-leg, 135;
- throwing in, 135, 213
-
- Findlay, Mr. W., 337
-
- Fisher, 412
-
- Fitzgerald, Mr. R., 306
-
- Flint, 170
-
- Flowers, 239
-
- Foley, Mr. C. P., 325, 327, 357
-
- Ford, F. G. J., 253, 256, 258, 325, 327
-
- —— A. F. J., 318
-
- Fortescue, Mr. A. T., 311
-
- Foster, Mr. H. K., 67, 331, 333, 337
-
- —— Mr. R. E., 51, 69, 335, 337
-
- Francis, Mr. C. K., 311
-
- Francis, Mr. H. H., 402
-
- Frankish, 412, 413
-
- Free Foresters Club, the, 197, 208, 356
-
- Freshmen’s Match, the, 339
-
- Fry, C. B., 51, 60, 72, 102, 103, 280, 331, 338
-
- Fuller Pilch, 157, 175
-
-
- Galloway, 261
-
- Game, Mr. W. H., 313, 314, 315
-
- Garnett, H. G., 412
-
- Garrett, 220, 222, 224, 229, 231, 236, 241
-
- Gate money, 142, 206, 207, 283, 300, 382, 404
-
- Gay, L. H., 251, 252, 253, 257, 330
-
- Gentlemen of England team, 339
-
- Gentlemen _v._ Players, 19, 303, 305, 346
-
- Georgetown, Demerara, ground at, 389
-
- Giddy, Mr., 402
-
- Giffen, 109, 231, 238, 240, 242, 246, 257, 258, 260, 262, 263, 264,
- 266, 267, 268
-
- Gloucestershire, 158, 163, 165, 172, 375
-
- Godalming, 20
-
- Godfrey, Mr. C. J. M., 320
-
- Goodman, Clifford, of Barbados, 388
-
- Goschen, Mr. Charles, 350
-
- Gosling, Mr. R. C., 325
-
- Graaf Reinet, 397, 402
-
- Grace, E. M., 172, 321
-
- —— G. F., 172
-
- —— W. G., 51, 57, 85, 86, 110, 159, 172, 210, 211, 212, 214, 218,
- 219, 229, 240, 245, 246, 247, 268, 271, 282, 307, 309, 315, 339,
- 395
-
- Graham, 247, 262
-
- Grahamstown, 397, 402
-
- Green, C. E., 171, 308
-
- Greene, Mr. A. D., 316
-
- Greenfield, Mr. F. F. J., 314
-
- Greenwood, Luke, 214
-
- Gregory, S. E., 169, 204 note, 244, 256, 257, 263, 266, 268, 269, 276,
- 279, 282, 286, 288
-
- Greig, J. E., 174
-
- Grounds, cricket, 415;
- soils on which a pitch cannot be made, 415;
- sandy soil, 416;
- adhesive land, 416;
- drainage, 416, 420;
- a slope, 417;
- preparation of the entire area, or only the cricket square, 417;
- reserve plots, 418;
- laying turf or sowing seed, 418;
- cost of turf, 419;
- a sward produced from seeds, 419;
- preparatory work, 421;
- weed seeds in soils, 422;
- enriching the soil, 423;
- surface preparation, 424;
- selection of seeds, 425-428;
- quantity of seed, 429;
- sowing, 429, 430;
- worm casts, 431;
- water and shade, 432;
- bird scares, 433;
- mowing, 434;
- rolling, 435;
- destruction of weeds, 435-436;
- improving cricket grounds, 438, 441
-
- Grundy, Jemmy, 199
-
- Gully, 23
-
- Gunn, W., 67, 212, 213, 214, 247, 286, 287
-
-
- Hadow, Mr. Walter, 311
-
- Haigh, 71, 81, 97, 346, 396, 397, 399, 402, 404, 405, 406
-
- Hall, Harry, of Farnham, 17, 40
-
- Hallam, 106
-
- Halliwell, 128, 403
-
- Hambledon Club, the, 4, 6, 8, 13, 14, 20, 154, 155
-
- Hammond, 20
-
- Hampshire, 20, 155, 158, 168, 174
-
- Hankey, Mr. Reginald, 304
-
- Hargreave, 410
-
- Harlequins, the, 197, 357
-
- Harris, David, 4, 13, 31, 39, 40, 42, 46
-
- —— Lord, 150, 167, 224, 312, 338
-
- Harrison-Ward, Mr. E. E., 311
-
- Harrow, 313, 326
-
- —— Wanderers, 355
-
- Hartley, J. C., 332
-
- —— Row, 20
-
- Hartopp, Mr. E. S., 304
-
- Hawke, Lord, 75, 312, 321, 352, 383, 384, 388, 396, 397, 409
-
- Hay, 170
-
- Hayward, Tom, 97, 115, 160, 199, 212, 213, 269, 273, 274, 276, 280,
- 281, 282, 284, 286, 287
-
- Hearne, J. T., 81, 105, 210, 264, 272, 273, 275, 277, 281, 319, 330
-
- Henery, Mr., 321
-
- Herts, 18
-
- Hewett, Mr. H. T., 329
-
- Hickton, 170
-
- Hill, Mr. A. J. L., 326, 327
-
- —— Clem, 253, 266, 268, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 285, 286,
- 288
-
- —— Mr. F. H., 311
-
- —— Mr. V. T., 329, 390, 391
-
- Hirst, 214, 273, 274, 276, 330
-
- Hole, Dean, 370
-
- Homerton Club, the, 20
-
- Horan, 220, 231, 236
-
- Hornby, A. N., 177, 215, 219
-
- Howell, 256, 277, 399
-
- Howitt, 166
-
- Hugessen, Mr. C. M. Knatchbull, 323
-
- Hume, 170
-
- Humphreys, 251, 253, 254, 256
-
-
- Iddeson, Roger, 214
-
- Incogniti Club, the, 352, 356
-
- Intercolonial Cup, the, 385
-
- Iredale, 255, 257, 261, 266, 268, 270, 272, 276
-
- Isis, the, 296
-
-
- Jackson, F. S., 57, 60, 67, 72, 108, 210, 212, 213, 247, 280, 282,
- 305, 326, 327, 328, 330, 338, 360
-
- Jardine, Mr. M. R., 328
-
- Jarvis, Mr. L. K., 239, 318
-
- Jephson, Mr. D. L. A., 71, 326, 327, 360
-
- Jessop, G. L., 52, 76, 81, 173, 208, 229, 254, 280, 285, 287, 288,
- 309, 334, 338, 389
-
- Johannesburg, 396, 399, 400, 401, 403
-
- Johnson, P. R., 410
-
- Jones, A. O., 67, 330, 338
-
- —— E., 248
-
- —— R. T., 329
-
- —— S., 236, 241
-
- —— 109, 267, 268, 278, 280, 288
-
-
- Kaffirs, 400
-
- Kelly, J., 266, 271, 275
-
- Kemp, Mr. M. C., 320
-
- Kempson, Mr. Mat, 305
-
- Kent, 5, 16, 18, 155, 158, 164, 175
-
- —— _v._ England, 19
-
- —— Festival, 356
-
- Key, Mr. K. J., 69, 310, 323, 335
-
- Kimberley, 397, 398, 401, 405
-
- King, J. B., 390, 391, 392
-
- Kingston, Mr. F. W., 318
-
- King William’s Town, 397, 402
-
- Kirwan, Mr. J. H., 304
-
- Kitcat, S. A. P., 394
-
- Knatchbull, Mr. H. E., 303
-
- Kortright, C. J., 171, 208, 324
-
-
- Lambert, Mr., 28
-
- Lancashire, 158, 163, 164, 165, 176
-
- Lane, C. G., 304
-
- —— of Barbados, 387
-
- Lang, Mr. Andrew, 2
-
- —— Mr. T. W., 307, 313, 314
-
- Latham, Mr. P. H., 330
-
- Laver, 281
-
- Lawrence, C., 218
-
- Leatham, A. E., 410
-
- Leconfield, the late Lord, 349
-
- Lee, Mr. G. B., 303
-
- Leeds, 281
-
- “Legs,” 21, 22
-
- Leicester, 17, 168, 178, 364
-
- Leigh, Mr. Chandos, 304, 349, 355
-
- Leslie, Mr. C. F. H., 319, 323
-
- Lester, J. A., 390
-
- Leveson-Gower, H. D. G., 365
-
- Lewis, Mr. R. P., 328
-
- Lilley, 270, 280, 281, 284, 287, 288
-
- Lillywhite, J., 218
-
- Lincolnshire, 160
-
- Liverpool, 177
-
- Llewellyn, 404
-
- Lockwood, 64, 110, 111, 208, 211, 247, 251, 253, 283
-
- Lockyer, 213
-
- Logan, Mr. J. D., 406
-
- Lohmann, George, 81, 91, 240, 242, 243, 245, 268
-
- Longman, Mr. George, 312
-
- Lord’s, 16, 19, 64, 105, 140, 162, 198, 237, 248, 268, 280, 298, 299,
- 301, 305, 316, 319, 321, 333, 336, 340, 348, 357, 358, 382, 388,
- 404
-
- Lucas, Mr. A. P., 171, 313, 316, 338
-
- —— R. S., 383
-
- Lyons, 228, 242, 245, 257
-
- Lyttelton, Mr. Alfred, 237, 238, 317, 338
-
- —— Mr. E., 314, 315, 316
-
- —— Mr. G. S., 308
-
-
- Macan, Mr., 314
-
- M’Arthy, R. F., 412, 413
-
- M’Cormick, Canon J., 305
-
- Macdonald, Dr., 364
-
- Macdonnell, 224, 226, 228, 229, 231, 237
-
- MacGregor, Gregor, 303, 324, 325, 327, 330, 338
-
- M’Ilwraith, 240
-
- M’Kibbin, 267, 270, 271, 272
-
- Maclaren, A. C., 51, 60, 62, 72, 177, 212, 213, 215, 251, 273, 395
-
- M’Leod, C., 255, 276, 277, 278
-
- —— R., 255
-
- Magdalen College School, 299, 302
-
- Malvernians, the Old, 355
-
- Manchester, 177, 237, 269, 281
-
- Marchant, F., 322
-
- Maritzburg Oval, the, 398
-
- Marlborough Blues, the, 355
-
- Married _v._ Single, 374, 377
-
- Marshall, H. M., 308
-
- Marsham, C. H. B., 336
-
- —— C. J. B., 357
-
- Martyn, Mr. H., 336
-
- Mason, J. R., 273, 274, 360
-
- Massie, 224, 228, 231, 236, 320
-
- Matting used for wickets, 397, 398, 399, 411
-
- May Week, 343
-
- M.C.C., 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 98, 162, 165, 166, 169, 197, 203, 300,
- 306, 316, 333, 339, 340
-
- Mead, 91, 105, 280
-
- Melbourne, 254, 259, 263, 277, 284
-
- Middlesex, 158, 164, 179, 326
-
- Middleton, 397, 402, 404
-
- Mid-off, 50, 133
-
- Mid-on, 133
-
- Midwinter, 195, 204, 220, 230, 233, 236, 316
-
- Milligan, the late F. W., 396, 402, 403, 406, 407
-
- Mitchell, Mr. R. A. H., 307
-
- —— Mr. F., 328, 331, 390, 391, 396, 402, 403
-
- Mold, 64, 106, 247
-
- Money, W. B., 309, 310
-
- Montreal, 392
-
- Mordaunt, Mr. G. J., 76, 331, 332, 333
-
- More, R. E., 391
-
- Morley, 219, 232
-
- Morton, Mr. P. H., 316, 317
-
- Moses, 246
-
- Murdoch, W. L., 67, 220, 222, 223, 224, 227, 229, 231, 237, 238, 241,
- 243, 320
-
- Mycroft, W., 170, 316
-
- Mynn, 362
-
-
- Negro, the West Indian, 385, 388
-
- Nepean, E. A., 180
-
- Net practice, 77
-
- Newlands Ground, the, Cape Town, 397
-
- New South Wales, 242, 255
-
- New South Wales and Victorian Cricket Association, 251
-
- New York, 389
-
- New Zealand, cricket in, 381, 382;
- visit of Lord Hawke’s team to, 409;
- arrival in Auckland, 410;
- match against West Coast XXII., 411;
- the first test match, 411;
- the New Zealand Eleven, 411;
- batting, 411, 412;
- bowling, 412
-
- New Zealand Cricket Council, 414
-
- Nicholls, Mr. B. E., 322
-
- No-balls, 156
-
- Noble, 104, 276, 277, 279, 280, 282, 286, 287, 288
-
- Norfolk, 19, 160
-
- Norman, Edward, 374
-
- —— Philip, 364
-
- Northamptonshire, 160
-
- Northumberland, 160
-
- Nottinghamshire, 17, 22, 147, 158, 163, 164, 165, 181, 201, 219, 330,
- 364
-
- Notts _v._ Kent, 364
-
- Nyren, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 23, 31, 34, 35, 41, 43
-
-
- O’Brien, Sir T. C., 322, 338
-
- Odell, W. W., 360
-
- Old Trafford Ground, 82, 169, 177, 382
-
- Onslow, Denzil, 307
-
- Oporto, 394
-
- Orford, Mr. L., 323
-
- Osbaldeston, Squire, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28
-
- Oscroft, 210, 211
-
- Ottoway, Mr. C. J., 310, 311
-
- Oval, the, 77, 96, 106, 107, 111, 141, 167, 248, 271, 282, 316, 321,
- 340, 388, 404
-
- Oxford, 296, 298, 302, 303, 307, 309, 310, 313, 322, 326, 327, 328,
- 333, 336, 340, 358, 375
-
- Oxford University Authentics, the, 359
-
- Oxford University Cricket Club, the, 299
-
-
- Page, Mr. H. V., 322
-
- Palairet, Mr. L. C. H., 51, 52, 212, 310, 329, 338
-
- —— R. C. N., 331
-
- Palmer, 109, 224, 225, 231, 234, 238, 241
-
- Parker’s Piece, 300
-
- Parr, G., 215, 217, 305
-
- Patterson, Mr. W. S., 314, 315, 319
-
- Pauncefote, Mr., 311
-
- Payne, Mr. A., 304
-
- Pearson, Mr. T. S., 358
-
- Peate, 87, 210, 230, 237, 238
-
- Peel, 81, 87, 95, 96, 239, 243, 245, 248, 251, 253, 255, 256, 257,
- 259, 260, 263, 265, 272
-
- Penn, Mr. E. F., 337
-
- Perambulators _v._ Etceteras, 339
-
- Perkins, Mr. Henry, 306
-
- —— T. N., 331
-
- Perrin, P., 171
-
- Philadelphia, 389, 390, 391
-
- Philipson, H., 251, 252, 324, 358
-
- Pilkington, C. C., 332, 333
-
- Pilling, 178
-
- Pinder, 213
-
- Platts, 170
-
- Plowden, H. M., 307, 308
-
- Plumb, 213
-
- Pooley, 213
-
- Poore, R. M., 174
-
- Popping crease, the, 31, 35, 50, 56
-
- Port Elizabeth, 397, 398, 401, 402
-
- Porter, 170
-
- Portugal, cricket in, 381, 394;
- tour of Mr. T. Westray’s Eleven, 394;
- matches against Oporto and Portugal, 394;
- the wickets, 395
-
- Powell, 406
-
- Powys, Mr. W. N., 312
-
- Pretoria, 397, 405
-
- Pritchard, H. Hesketh, 360
-
- Professionals. _See_ Amateurs and Professionals
-
- Pycroft, Mr., quoted 2, 7, 8, 9, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 33, 34,
- 38, 39, 44
-
-
- Quaife, 286, 288
-
- Queensland, 235, 256
-
- Quidnuncs, the, 197, 208, 357
-
-
- Raikes, G. B., 332
-
- Ramsay, Mr. R. C., 320
-
- Ranjitsinhji, K. S., 51, 60, 63, 65, 69, 72, 81, 110, 111, 212, 213,
- 270, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 279, 280, 309, 329, 338, 351,
- 391, 395
-
- Rashleigh, Mr. W., 323
-
- Read, Maurice, 214
-
- —— W. W., 65, 232, 234, 237, 238, 240, 247, 397, 407
-
- Reese, D., New Zealand, 411, 412
-
- Reid, Sir Robert, 307
-
- Rhodes, 69, 71, 81, 87, 96, 113, 210, 283
-
- Richardson, H. A., 309
-
- —— Tom, 64, 80, 97, 109, 111, 208, 247, 251, 253, 255, 256, 257,
- 258, 259, 260, 263, 264, 268, 270, 271, 273, 275, 277, 278
-
- Riddings, 303
-
- Ridley, A. W., 219, 313, 314, 351
-
- Robertson-Walker, Mr. J., 358
-
- Rock, Mr. C. W., 322
-
- Rowbotham, 214
-
- Rowe, 397, 402, 404
-
- Royle, Mr. Vernon, 313
-
- Rugby, 319
-
- Rutter, Mr. E., 356
-
-
- Sackville, Lord John, 5
-
- St. John’s Wood, 299, 301, 341
-
- St. Vincent, 388
-
- San Francisco, 410
-
- Saunders, 287
-
- Scattergood, 390, 391
-
- Scott, 236, 237, 241
-
- Scotton, 230, 282
-
- Selby, 230
-
- Seniors’ Match, 339
-
- Sewell, Mr. C. O. H., 390
-
- Shacklock, 89
-
- Shalders, of Kimberley, 405, 406
-
- Shaw, Alfred, 105, 106, 210, 215, 219, 230, 239, 307
-
- Shaw, Jemmy, 199
-
- —— Mr. E. D., 320
-
- Shine, Mr. E. B., 328, 334
-
- Shrewsbury, Arthur, 87, 200, 212, 213, 230, 239, 240, 242, 243, 247,
- 330
-
- Shuter, 215, 323
-
- Silwood Park, 356
-
- Simpson, 23
-
- Simpson Hayward, J. H., 360
-
- Sims, Mr., 314
-
- Sinclair, 397, 403, 404, 406
-
- Skeat, Mr., 1
-
- “Slips,” 132, 133
-
- Small, 6, 11, 38, 46, 155
-
- Smith, Arthur, 314
-
- —— Mr. C. A., 322
-
- —— E., 94, 329
-
- —— G. O., 76, 332, 333, 334
-
- —— of Trinidad, 387
-
- Smokers _v._ Non-Smokers, 348
-
- Somerset, 158, 161, 168, 182, 321, 325
-
- South Africa, cricket in, 396;
- visit of Lord Hawke’s team, 396;
- matting wickets, 397;
- ground, 398;
- length of matting, 399;
- no rolling necessary, 400;
- cricket on matting, 401;
- match at Cape Town, 402;
- at King William’s Town, 402;
- matches at Johannesburg, 403;
- match against the Transvaal, 403;
- game against South Africa, 403;
- disappointment at Johannesburg, 404;
- two days’ match against Pretoria, 405;
- at Kimberley, 405;
- Buluwayo, 405;
- ten days in Rhodesia, 405;
- the last matches at Cape Town, 406;
- the first English team to visit South Africa, 407;
- the team in England, 407, 408;
- wicket-keeping, 414;
- fielding, 414
-
- South African Cricket Association, 400
-
- Spofforth, 84, 91, 109, 110, 220, 224, 225, 229, 231, 232, 234, 238,
- 240, 321
-
- Square leg, running away to, 49
-
- Stamford, Lord, 300
-
- Stanning, J., 410
-
- Steel, A. G., 87, 177, 212, 234, 237, 238, 240, 305, 315, 316, 317,
- 318, 321, 338, 347
-
- Steel, D. Q., 318
-
- —— E. E., 360
-
- Stephenson, H. H., 217
-
- Stevens, Edward, “Lumpy,” 6, 8, 11, 39, 46, 155
-
- Stewart, W. A., 309, 312
-
- Stoddart, A. E., 48, 57, 62, 212, 213, 224, 240, 245, 246, 247, 251,
- 253, 255, 256, 258, 260, 262, 263, 265, 269, 273, 388
-
- Stool Ball, 31
-
- Storer, W., 170, 273, 276
-
- Streatfield, Mr. E. C., 326, 327
-
- Strutt, Mr., 2
-
- Studd, Mr. C. T., 318, 319, 320, 322, 338
-
- —— G. B., 318, 321, 331
-
- —— J. E. K., 319, 331
-
- Suffolk, 160
-
- Surrey, 18, 20, 97, 111, 155, 163, 164, 165, 183, 196, 197, 216, 316,
- 327, 363
-
- Sussex, 15, 156, 164, 165, 185, 327
-
- Sydney, 233, 235, 256, 261, 273, 284, 287
-
-
- Tabor, Mr. A. S., 313
-
- Tarrant, 160
-
- Tate, 72, 107, 399
-
- Taylor, A. C., 394
-
- —— C., 45
-
- —— C. G., 302, 304
-
- —— T. L., 72, 337
-
- Tebbut, C. M., 171
-
- Thompson, 410
-
- Thornton, C. I., 228, 309, 315, 327, 330, 354
-
- Toll, 23
-
- Tonbridge, 323
-
- Toppin, Mr. C., 323
-
- Toronto, 392
-
- Townsend, Mr. Ch., 87, 177, 280
-
- Townshend, Mr., 311
-
- Traill, Mr. W. F., 304
-
- Transvaal, the, 402
-
- Trevor, Captain, 352
-
- Trinidad, 381, 384, 386, 387, 389
-
- Trott, A. E., 72, 91, 99, 180, 243, 255, 257, 261, 262, 396, 397, 402,
- 403, 404, 406
-
- —— H., 255, 258, 261, 263, 264, 265, 266, 269, 270, 276
-
- Trumble, J., 71, 240
-
- Trumble, H., 243, 244, 247, 259, 267, 271, 272, 275, 276, 277, 278,
- 281, 284, 286
-
- Trumper, Victor, 60, 66, 69, 72, 280, 282, 286
-
- Tucker, K., of New Zealand, 411, 412
-
- Tufton, Hon. H., 19
-
- —— Hon. J., 19
-
- Turner, 91, 109, 242, 244, 246, 256, 259, 262, 263, 264
-
- Tyldesley, 60, 68, 72, 73, 178, 212, 213, 214, 286, 287, 288, 396,
- 397, 402, 403, 406
-
- Tylecote, Mr. E. F. S., 232, 311, 338
-
- Tyler, 100
-
-
- Ulyett, 213, 224, 230, 237, 239, 310
-
- Umpires, Country, 375, 379
-
- United States, cricket in, 381
-
- University cricket. _See_ Cricket
-
- —— matches, 296, 297, 305, 310, 312, 313, 315, 331, 332, 336
-
- —— Parks, 299
-
- Upham, 412, 413
-
- Uppingham Rovers, the, 355
-
-
- Vancouver, 381
-
- Vernon, G. F., 242
-
- Village cricket. _See_ Cricket
-
- Vine, 64, 72, 101
-
-
- Waddy, P. S., 332
-
- Wainwright, 98, 214, 273
-
- Walker, Harry, 41
-
- —— Mr. G. G., 170
-
- —— Mr. J. G., 321
-
- —— Tom, 19, 28, 40, 43
-
- —— V. E., 215, 305
-
- Walters, 244
-
- Wanderers’ Ground, Johannesburg, 398, 399, 404
-
- Ward, Mr., quoted, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 20, 33, 34
-
- —— Mr. Arthur, 247, 251, 253, 256, 258, 264, 265
-
- Warner, Mr. P. F., 332, 333, 350, 351, 381, 410
-
- Warwickshire, 158, 168, 187, 208
-
- Wass, 112
-
- Webbe, A. J., 219, 313, 314, 316, 331, 357
-
- Wellington, New Zealand, 411
-
- Wells, Mr. C. M., 69, 87, 88, 89, 90, 328, 357, 360
-
- West Indies, cricket in, 381, 382;
- visit of R. S. Lucas’s team, 383;
- visit of Lord Hawke’s team, 384;
- match against Queen’s Park Cricket Club at Trinidad, 384;
- the Intercolonial Cup, 385;
- wickets, 386;
- visit of West Indian team to England, 386;
- visit of last English team, 387;
- general progress of cricket in, 387;
- climate, 387;
- grounds, 389
-
- Westray, T., 394
-
- Wharton, Major, 397, 407
-
- Whatman, A. D., 410
-
- White of Ryegate, 10, 11
-
- Whitfield, Mr. Herbert, 317
-
- Whittom, Dick, 23
-
- Wickets, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 19, 82, 221, 252, 397
-
- Wicket-keeping, 125
-
- Wides, 156
-
- Wild, 214
-
- Wills, Mr. T. W., 306
-
- Wilson, C. E. M., 334, 337, 396
-
- —— E. R., 337, 391, 406
-
- Windmill Down, 20
-
- Wisden, quoted, 115, 335
-
- Woodcock, 330
-
- Woods of Demerara, 384, 387
-
- —— Mr. S. M. J., 303, 305, 318, 324, 325, 327
-
- Woof, 173
-
- Worcestershire, 158, 161, 168, 188, 208, 332
-
- Wordsworth, Mr. Charles, Bishop of St. Andrews, 302
-
- Works referred to, W. G. Grace’s _Cricket_, 163;
- Home Gordon’s _Cricket Form at a Glance_, 351;
- Norman’s _West Kent Cricket_, 364;
- Ranjitsinhji’s _Jubilee Book of Cricket_, 61, 169;
- _Surrey Cricket_, 363;
- Waghorn’s _Cricket Scores_, 152
-
- Wright, Mr. C. W., 322, 323
-
- —— Mr. L. G., 170
-
- Wykehamists, Old, 355
-
- Wynyard, E. G., 174
-
-
- Yardley, W., 309, 310, 336
-
- Yonge, Mr. G. E., 303
-
- Yorkshire, 96, 111, 146, 152, 158, 161, 163, 165, 189-191, 201, 316
-
- Young, 171
-
-
- Zingari, I, Club, 197, 348, 349, 355
-
-
-THE END
-
-
-_Printed by_ R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, _Edinburgh_.
-
-
-
-
- FOOTNOTES:
-
-[1] [_Note._—It is perhaps only the writer’s personal modesty that
-precludes him from giving the Australian an English companion in this
-special class.—ED.]
-
-[2] Since these words were written Bainbridge has resigned and J. F.
-Byrne has filled his place.
-
-[3] This was done by Leicestershire a few months back when Mr. Crawford
-was made Secretary.
-
-[4] The examination in bankruptcy of Mr. Gregory, the Australian
-cricketer, in Australia last April, proves that this is an accurate
-statement.
-
-[5] Allusion may here be made to the match with the cumbrous title,
-“Gentlemen of England who had not been educated at the Universities
-_v._ Gentlemen of England who had been educated at the Universities
-(Past and Present),” which was played at the Oval, 15th and 16th
-June 1874. The Gentlemen “who had not” won by an innings and 76
-runs, Messrs. W. G. Grace and Appleby bowling unchanged in the first
-University innings, which only amounted to 58. The game was never
-repeated.
-
-
-
-
- TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES:
-
-—Obvious print and punctuation errors were corrected.
-
-—Superscripts are rendered as a^s.
-
-
-
-
-
-End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Cricket, by Horace Gordon Hutchinson
-
-*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRICKET ***
-
-***** This file should be named 50373-0.txt or 50373-0.zip *****
-This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
- http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/3/7/50373/
-
-Produced by Giovanni Fini, MWS and the Online Distributed
-Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
-produced from images generously made available by The
-Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
-
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
-will be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
-one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
-(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
-permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
-set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
-copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
-protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
-Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
-charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
-do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
-rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
-such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
-research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
-practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
-subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
-redistribution.
-
-
-
-*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
-Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
-http://gutenberg.org/license).
-
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
-all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
-If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
-terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
-entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
-and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
-works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
-or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
-collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
-individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
-located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
-copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
-works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
-are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
-Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
-freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
-this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
-the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
-keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
-Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
-a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
-the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
-before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
-creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
-Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
-the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
-States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
-access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
-whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
-copied or distributed:
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
-almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
-re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
-with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
-from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
-posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
-and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
-or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
-with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
-work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
-through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
-Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
-1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
-terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
-to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
-permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
-word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
-distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
-"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
-posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
-you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
-copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
-request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
-form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
-that
-
-- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
- owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
- has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
- Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
- must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
- prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
- returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
- sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
- address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
- the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
- License. You must require such a user to return or
- destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
- and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
- Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
- money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
- of receipt of the work.
-
-- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
-forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
-both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
-Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
-Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
-collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
-works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
-"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
-corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
-property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
-computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
-your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
-your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
-the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
-refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
-providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
-receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
-is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
-opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
-WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
-WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
-If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
-law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
-interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
-the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
-provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
-with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
-promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
-harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
-that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
-or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
-work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
-Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
-
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
-including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
-because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
-people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
-To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
-and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
-
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
-Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
-http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
-permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
-Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
-throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
-809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
-business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact
-information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
-page at http://pglaf.org
-
-For additional contact information:
- Dr. Gregory B. Newby
- Chief Executive and Director
- gbnewby@pglaf.org
-
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
-SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
-particular state visit http://pglaf.org
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
-To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
-
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
-works.
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
-with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
-Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
-
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
-unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
-keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
-
-
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
-
- http://www.gutenberg.org
-
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/50373-0.zip b/old/50373-0.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 1d7eebd..0000000
--- a/old/50373-0.zip
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h.zip b/old/50373-h.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 4c92e2d..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h.zip
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/50373-h.htm b/old/50373-h/50373-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index 3fdc795..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/50373-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,19089 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
- "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
- <head>
- <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
- <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
- <title>
- The Project Gutenberg eBook of Cricket, by Horace G. Hutchinson (ed).
- </title>
- <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
- <style type="text/css">
-
-body {margin-left: 10%;
- margin-right: 10%;}
-
-div.limit {max-width: 35em;
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;}
-
-div.chapter {page-break-before: always;}
-
-.red {color: red;}
-
-.ls1 {letter-spacing: 0.4em;
- padding-left: 0.2em;}
-
- h1,h2,h3 {text-align: center; /* all headings centered */
- clear: both;}
-
-p {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 1.5em;}
-
-.pch {margin-top: 2em;
- margin-bottom: 1.5em;
- font-size: 120%;
- text-align: center;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pca {margin-top: 0.5em;
- margin-bottom: 2em;
- text-align: center;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.ph4 {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: justify;
- padding-left: 4em;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: -2em;}
-
-.pc {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: center;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pc1 {margin-top: 1em;
- text-align: center;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pc4 {margin-top: 4em;
- text-align: center;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pn {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pn1 {margin-top: 1em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pn2 {margin-top: 2em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pp6 {margin-top: 0em;
- font-size: 90%;
- text-align: left;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;
- padding-left: 6em;}
-
-.pp8 {margin-top: 0em;
- font-size: 90%;
- text-align: left;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;
- padding-left: 8em;}
-
-.pr {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: right;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pr4 {margin-top: 0.2em;
- padding-right: 4em;
- text-align: right;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.pbq {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0;
- text-indent: 1.2em;
- font-size: 90%;
- margin-left: 5%;
- margin-right: 5%;}
-
-.pni {margin-top: 0.5em;
- font-size: 90%;
- text-align: left;
- margin-left: 5%;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: -1em;}
-
-.pnii {margin-top: 0em;
- font-size: 90%;
- text-align: left;
- margin-left: 10%;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: -1em;}
-
-.pniii {margin-top: 0em;
- font-size: 90%;
- text-align: left;
- margin-left: 15%;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: -1em;}
-
-.pfn4 {margin-top: 1em;
- font-size: 90%;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0;
- text-indent: 0em;
- margin-left: 4em;
- margin-right: 1em;}
-
-.ptn {margin-top: 0.3em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: 0;
- text-indent: -1em;
- margin-left: 2%;}
-
-.p1 {margin-top: 1em;}
-.p2 {margin-top: 2em;}
-.p4 {margin-top: 4em;}
-
-.small {font-size: 75%;}
-.reduct {font-size: 90%;}
-.lmid {font-size: 110%;}
-.mid {font-size: 125%;}
-.large {font-size: 150%;}
-.elarge {font-size: 175%;}
-
-hr {width: 33%;
- margin-top: 2em;
- margin-bottom: 2em;
- margin-left: 33.5%;
- margin-right: 33.5%;
- clear: both;}
-
-hr.chap {width: 65%;
- margin-left: 17.5%;
- margin-right: 17.5%;}
-
-table {margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;}
-
- .tdl {text-align: left;}
- .tdr {text-align: right;}
- .tdc {text-align: center;}
-
- .tdlm {text-align: left;
- vertical-align: middle;}
-
- .tdlh {text-align: left;
- vertical-align: top;
- padding-top: 0.5em;}
-
- .tdlx {text-align: left;
- width: 4em;}
-
- .tdrh {text-align: right;
- vertical-align: top;
- padding-top: 0.5em;}
-
- .tdrl {text-align: right;
- vertical-align: bottom;
- width: 10em;}
-
- .tdrw {text-align: right;
- vertical-align: bottom;
- width: 6em;}
-
- .tdrx {text-align: right;
- vertical-align: bottom;
- width: 1em;}
-
- .tdcl {text-align: center;
- vertical-align: bottom;}
-
- .tdt {text-align: left;
- vertical-align: top;
- padding-left: 2em;
- text-indent: -1.5em;
- padding-top: 0.5em;}
-
-#toc, #toi
- {width: 80%;
- line-height: 1em;
- margin-top: 1em;}
-
-#tc00, #tc01, #tc02, #tc03, #tc04, #tc05, #tc06, #tc07, #tc08, #tc09,
-#tc10, #tc11, #tc12, #tc13, #tc14, #tc15, #tc16, #tc17, #tc18, #tc19,
-#tc20, #tc21, #tc22, #tc23, #tc24, #tc25, #tc26, #tc27, #tc28, #tc29,
-#tc30, #tc31, #tc32, #tc33, #tc34, #tc35
- {width: 28em;
- font-size: 90%;
- font-weight: normal;}
-
-#tt01, #tt03
- {width: 90%;
- font-size: 90%;
- line-height: 1em;
- margin-top: 1em;}
-
-#tt02, #tt05
- {width: 60%;
- font-size: 90%;
- line-height: 1em;
- margin-top: 1em;}
-
-#tt04
- {width: 45%;
- font-size: 90%;
- line-height: 1em;
- margin-top: 1em;}
-
-
-#toc, #toi
- {width: 80%;
- line-height: 1em;
- margin-top: 1em;}
-
-
-.pagenum { /* visibility: hidden; */
- position: absolute;
- left: 94%;
- color: gray;
- font-size: smaller;
- text-align: right;
- text-indent: 0em;
- font-style: normal;
- font-weight: normal;}
-
-.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;}
-
-.beg {font-variant: small-caps;
- font-size: 110%;}
-
-.caption {font-weight: bold;}
-
-.pcap {margin-top: 0.2em;
- text-align: center;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;
- width: 26em;
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;}
-
-.pcapn {margin-top: 0.2em;
- font-weight: normal;
- text-align: center;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- text-indent: 0em;
- width: 26em;
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;}
-
-.figcenter {margin: auto;
- text-align: center;
- margin-top: 2em;
- margin-bottom: 2em;}
-
-.figt {margin: auto;
- text-align: center;
- margin-top: 0em;
- margin-bottom: 0em;}
-
-.footnotes {border: dashed 1px;
- padding: 1em;}
-
-.ln1 {position: absolute;
- text-align: right;
- top: auto;
- margin-left: -2em;}
-
-.label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;}
-
-
-.fnanchor {vertical-align: super;
- font-size: .8em;
- text-decoration: none;
- font-style: normal;
- font-weight: normal;}
-
-.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA;
- color: black;
- font-size:smaller;
- padding:0.5em;
- margin-bottom:5em;
- font-family:sans-serif, serif; }
- </style>
- </head>
-<body>
-
-
-<pre>
-
-The Project Gutenberg EBook of Cricket, by Horace Gordon Hutchinson
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
-almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
-re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
-with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license
-
-
-Title: Cricket
-
-Editor: Horace Gordon Hutchinson
-
-Release Date: November 3, 2015 [EBook #50373]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: UTF-8
-
-*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRICKET ***
-
-
-
-
-Produced by Giovanni Fini, MWS and the Online Distributed
-Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
-produced from images generously made available by The
-Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-</pre>
-
-<div class="limit">
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/cover.jpg" width="350" height="536" alt="" />
-</div>
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_i" id="Page_i">[i]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<p class="pc4 elarge">CRICKET</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_ii" id="Page_ii">[ii]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/fr.jpg" width="400" height="506" id="fr"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc00" summary="c01">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>R. James.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<p class="pc"><i>TOSSING FOR INNINGS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iii" id="Page_iii">[iii]</a></span></p>
-
-<h1 class="p4 red ls1"><span class="large">CRICKET</span></h1>
-
-<p class="pc4">EDITED BY</p>
-<p class="pc1 large">HORACE G. HUTCHINSON</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/title.jpg" width="400" height="287"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<p class="pc1">“<i>DESIPERE IN LOCO</i>”</p>
-
-<p class="pn mid p4">
-LONDON: PUBLISHED AT THE OFFICES
-OF “COUNTRY LIFE,” TAVISTOCK STREET,
-COVENT GARDEN, W.C. &amp; BY GEORGE
-NEWNES, <span class="smcap">Ltd.</span> SOUTHAMPTON STREET,
-STRAND, W.C.</p>
-<p class="pr mid">MCMIII</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iv" id="Page_iv">[iv]</a><br /><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-007.jpg" width="400" height="271"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">PREFACE</h2>
-
-<p class="pn2"><span class="beg">Surely</span> it is sheer neglect of opportunity offered
-by an official position if, being an editor, one has
-no prefatory word to say of the work that one is
-editing. It is said that that which is good requires
-no praise, but it is a saying that is contradicted at
-every turn&mdash;or else all that is advertised must be very
-bad. While it is our firm belief that the merits of
-the present book&mdash;<i>The Country Life Cricket Book</i>&mdash;are
-many and various (it would be an insult to the
-able heads of the different departments into which
-the great subject is herein divided to think otherwise),
-we believe also that the book has one very
-special and even unique merit. We believe, and are
-very sure, that there has never before been given to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[vi]</a></span>
-the public any such collection of interesting old
-prints illustrative of England’s national game as
-appear in the present volume. It is due to the kind
-generosity of the Marylebone Cricket Club, as well
-as of divers private persons, that we are able to illustrate
-the book in this exceptional way; and we (that
-is to say, all who are concerned in the production)
-beg to take the opportunity of giving most cordial
-thanks to those who have given this invaluable help,
-and so greatly assisted in making the book not only
-attractive, but also original in its attraction. In the
-first place, the prints form in some measure a picture-history
-of the national game, from the early days
-when men played with the wide low wicket and the
-two stumps, down through all the years that the bat
-was developing out of a curved hockey-stick into its
-present shape, and that the use of the bat at the
-same time was altering from the manner of the man
-with the scythe, meeting the balls called “daisy-cutters,”
-to the straightforward upright batting of the
-classical examples. The classical examples perhaps
-are exhibited most ably in the pictures of Mr. G. F.
-Watts, which show us that the human form divine
-can be studied in its athletic poses equally well (save
-for the disadvantage of the draping flannels) on the
-English field of cricket as in the Greek gymnasium.
-The prints, too, give us a picture-history of the
-costumes of the game. There are the “anointed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[vii]</a></span>
-clod-stumpers” of Broadhalfpenny going in to bat
-with the smock, most inconvenient, we may think,
-of dresses. There are the old-fashioned fellows who
-were so hardly parted from their top-hats. These
-heroes of a bygone age are also conspicuous in braces.
-We get a powerful hint, too, from the pictures, of
-the varying estimation in which the game has been
-held at different times. There is a suggestion of
-reverence in some of the illustrations&mdash;a sense that the
-artist knew himself to be handling a great theme.
-In others we see with pain that the treatment is
-almost comic, certainly frivolous. We hardly can
-suppose that the picture of the ladies’ cricket match
-would encourage others of the sex to engage in the
-noble game, although “Miss Wicket” of the famous
-painting has a rather attractive although pensive air&mdash;she
-has all the aspect of having got out for a duck’s
-egg.</p>
-
-<p>More decidedly to the same effect&mdash;of its differing
-hold on popular favour&mdash;do we get a hint from the
-spectators assembled (but assembled is too big a word
-for their little number) to view the game. “Lord’s”
-on an Australian match day, or a Gents <i>v.</i> Players,
-or Oxford and Cambridge, hardly would be recognised
-by one of the old-time heroes, if we could call
-him up again across the Styx to take a second innings.
-He would wonder what all the people had come to
-look at. He hardly would believe that they were<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">[viii]</a></span>
-come to see the game he used to play to a very
-meagre gallery in his life. But he would be pleased
-to observe the progress of the world&mdash;how appreciative
-it grew of what was best in it as it grew older.</p>
-
-<p>Another thing that the collection illustrates is the
-various changes of site of the headquarters of the
-game, if it had a headquarters before it settled down
-to its present place of honour in St. John’s Wood.
-There is a picture (<i>vide</i> p. v) of “Thomas Lord’s
-first Cricket Ground, Dorset Square, Marylebone.
-Match played June 20, 1793, between the Earls of
-Winchilsea and Darnley for 1000 guineas.” With
-regard to this interesting picture, Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane,
-in his catalogue of the pictures, drawings,
-etc., in possession of the Marylebone Cricket Club,
-has a note as follows:&mdash;“This match was Kent
-(Lord Darnley’s side) <i>v.</i> Marylebone, with Walker,
-Beldham, and Wills (Lord Winchilsea’s side). M.C.C.
-won by ten wickets. It will be noticed that only
-two stumps are represented as being used, whereas,
-according to <i>Scores and Biographies</i>, it is known that
-as far back as 1775 a third stump had been introduced;
-many representations, however, of the game
-at a later date show only two stumps.” No doubt
-at this early period there was no very fully acknowledged
-central authority, and such little details as
-these were much a matter of local option. The wicket
-shown in this picture does not seem to differ at all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix">[ix]</a></span>
-from the wicket in the picture of “Cricket” by
-F. Hayman, R.A. (<i>vide</i> p. 1), in the possession of
-the Marylebone Club, though the date of the latter
-is as early as 1743. Neither does the bat appear to
-have made much evolution in the interval. It is
-on the authority of Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane, in
-the catalogue above quoted, that we can give “about
-1750” for the date of the picture named “A Match
-in Battersea Fields” (<i>vide</i> p. 3), in which St. Paul’s
-dome appears in the background. Here they seem
-to be playing with the three stumps, early as the
-date is. Again, in the fine picture, “painted for
-David Garrick” by Richard Wilson, of “Cricket
-at Hampton Wick” (<i>vide</i> p. 375), three stumps are
-in use, and the bat has become much squared and
-straightened. Of course the pictures obviously fall
-into two chief classes&mdash;one in which “the play’s the
-thing”; the cricket is the object of the artist’s
-representation; the other in which the cricket is
-only used as an incidental feature in the foreground,
-to enliven a scene of which the serious interest is in
-the background or surroundings. But the pictures
-in which the cricket is the main, if not the
-only, interest are very much more numerous. A
-quaintly suggestive picture enough is that described
-in Sir S. Ponsonby-Fane’s catalogue as, “Situation
-of H.M.’s Ships <i>Fury</i> and <i>Hecla</i> at Igloolie.
-Sailors playing Cricket on the Ice.” In this, of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_x" id="Page_x">[x]</a></span>
-course, there is no historical interest about the
-cricket (<i>vide</i> p. 392). The one-legged and one-armed
-cricketers make a picture that is curious,
-though not very pleasant to contemplate; and the
-same is to be said of the rather vulgar representation
-of the ladies’ cricket match noticed above. The
-“Ticket to see a Cricket Match” (<i>vide</i> p. 40)
-shows a bat of the most inordinate, and probably
-quite impossible, length; but we may easily suppose
-that the artist, consciously or unwittingly, has exaggerated
-the weapon of his day. Here too are
-two stumps only. We may notice the price of the
-ticket as somewhat remarkably high, 2s. 6d.; but it
-was in the days when matches were played for large
-sums of money, so perhaps all was in proportion
-(length of bat excepted, be it understood). There
-is a picture of the “celebrated Cricket Field near
-White Conduit House, 1787” (<i>vide</i> p. 17), which
-is named a “Representation of the Noble Game of
-Cricket.” It is a picture of some merit, and evidently
-careful execution, and here too the players
-are seen with bats of a prodigious length; so it may
-be that these huge weapons came into fashion for a
-while, only to be abandoned again when their uselessness
-was proved, or perhaps when the legislature
-began to make exact provision with regard to the
-implements used. In this same picture of the “Noble
-Game of Cricket” a man may be seen standing at<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xi" id="Page_xi">[xi]</a></span>
-deep square leg, who is apparently scoring the
-“notches,” or “notching” the runs, on a piece of
-stick. This at least appears to be his occupation,
-and it is interesting to observe it at this comparatively
-late date, and at headquarters. In the
-match between the sides led by Lord Winchilsea and
-Lord Darnley respectively, it is seen that there are
-two tail-coated gentlemen sitting on a bench, and probably
-scoring on paper, for it is hardly likely that they
-can have been reporting for the press at that time.
-England did not then demand the news of the fall
-of each wicket, as it does now. Nevertheless, that
-there must have been a good deal of enthusiasm for
-the game, even at a pretty early date, is shown
-conclusively enough by the engraving (<i>vide</i> p. 190)
-of the “North-East View of the Cricket Grounds
-at Darnall, near Sheffield, Yorkshire.” What the
-precise date of this picture may be I do not know,
-but it is evident that it must be old, from the
-costumes of the players, who are in knee-breeches
-and the hideous kind of caps that have been reintroduced
-with the coming of the motor-car. Also
-the umpires, with their top-hatted heads and tightly-breeched
-lower limbs, show that this picture is not
-modern. And yet the concourse of spectators is
-immense. Even allowing for some pardonable
-exaggeration on the part of the artist, it is certain
-that many people must have been in the habit of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xii" id="Page_xii">[xii]</a></span>
-looking on at matches, otherwise this picture would
-be absurd; and this, be it observed, was not in the
-southern counties, which we have been led to look
-on as the nurseries of cricket, but away from all
-southern influence, far from headquarters, in Yorkshire,
-near Sheffield. To be sure, it may have been
-within the wide sphere of influence of the great
-Squire Osbaldeston, but even so the picture is
-suggestive. The scorers are here seated at a regular
-table. A very curious representation of the game is
-that given in the picture by James Pollard, named
-“A Match on the Heath” (<i>vide</i> p. 29). It is
-a good picture. What is curious is that, though
-the period at which Pollard was producing his
-work was from 1821 to 1846, the bats used
-in the game are shown as slightly curved, and,
-more notably, the wicket is still of the two stumps
-only. There are only two alternative ways of
-accounting for this: either they still played in
-certain places with the two-stump wicket, or else,
-which is not likely, Pollard was very careless, and no
-cricketer, and took his cricket apparatus from some
-older picture. I observe, by the way, that I have,
-on the whole, done less than justice to the ladies, as
-they are portrayed playing the game, for though it
-is true that the one picture is, as noticed, vulgar
-enough, there is another, “An Eleven of Miss
-Wickets” (<i>vide</i> p. 248), that is pretty and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xiii" id="Page_xiii">[xiii]</a></span>
-graceful. While some of the pictures in this collection
-are interesting mainly for their curiosity, or as
-being something like an illustrated history or diary
-of events and changes in the game, there are others
-that are real works of art and beauty, sometimes
-depending mainly on their expression of the game
-itself, and sometimes only using it as an adjunct to
-the scenery. Of the former kind, we must notice
-most especially the remarkable series of drawings by
-Mr. G. F. Watts, R.A., which show the batsman in
-the various positions of defence or attack. To very
-many it will be a revelation that the great artist
-could lend his pencil to a matter of such trivial
-importance (as some base souls may deem it) as the
-game of cricket; but without a doubt that great
-knowledge of anatomy, which has been one of the
-strong points in all his paintings, has been learned
-in some measure from these studies, which also give
-it a very high degree of expression. There is a force,
-a vigour, a meaning about these sketches which are
-interesting enough, if for no other reason than because
-they show so vividly the inadequacy of the mechanical
-efforts of photography, when brought into competition,
-as a means of expression, with the pencil of a
-really great artist. You feel almost as if you must
-jump aside out of the way of the fellow stepping
-forward to drive the leg volley, or of the fearful man
-drawn back to cut, so forcefully is the force expressed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xiv" id="Page_xiv">[xiv]</a></span>
-with which the batsman is inevitably going to
-hit the ball (<i>vide</i> p. 67). One of the most
-charming pictures of those who have taken cricket
-for their theme is that which is lent by His Majesty
-the King to the M.C.C., and is styled “A Village
-Match.” It is by Louis Belanger, of date 1768 (<i>vide</i>
-p. 361). Charming, too, is the picture attributed
-to Gainsborough, “Portrait of a Youth with a
-Cricket-bat”; it is said to be a portrait of George
-IV. as a boy, but it seems doubtful. The bat here is
-curved, but hardly perceptibly; it shows the last
-stage in evolution before the straight bat was reached
-(<i>vide</i> p. 208). Our frontispiece is a jolly scene&mdash;the
-ragged boys tossing the bat for innings&mdash;“Flat
-or Round?” and the fellow in the background
-heaping up the coats for a wicket. We all of us
-have played and loved that kind of cricket. A
-wonderfully good and detailed picture is that of
-“Kent <i>v.</i> Sussex” (<i>vide</i> p. 137). It is a picture
-of a match in progress on the Brighton ground, and
-Brighton is seen in the background; in the foreground
-is a group of celebrated cricketers in the
-spectators’ ring, yet posed, in a way that gives a
-look of artificiality to the whole scene, so as to
-show their faces to the artist. Even old Lillywhite,
-bowling, is turning his head quaintly, to show his
-features. One of the most conspicuous figures is the
-great Alfred Mynn, who was to a former generation<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xv" id="Page_xv">[xv]</a></span>
-what W. G. Grace has been to ours. All the figures
-are portraits, and every accessory to the scene is
-worked out most carefully. The drawing is by
-W. H. Mason. Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane has a note
-on this picture: “As a matter of fact, this match, as
-here represented, did not take place, the men shown
-in the engraving never having played together in
-such a match, but they all played for their respective
-counties about 1839-1841.” Very delightful, too, is
-the picture that is the last in our book (p. 433), “At
-the End of the Innings”&mdash;an old veteran with eye
-still keen, and firm mouth, telling of a determination
-to keep his wicket up and the ball down “as well as
-he knows how,” and with an interest in the game
-of his youth unabated by years. A jolly painting is
-that of “Old Charlton Church and Manor House”
-(<i>vide</i> p. 415), with the coach and four darting past,
-and the boys at cricket on the village green. And
-last, but to many of us greatest of all, there is the
-portrait of Dr. W. G. Grace, from Mr. A. Stuart
-Wortley’s picture, which sums up a modern ideal of
-cricket that we have not yet found ourselves able to
-get past (<i>vide</i> p. 228).</p>
-
-<p>There are other pictures, not a few, that we
-might select for notice, but already this ramble goes
-beyond due prefatory limits. There are the sketches
-in which the cricket is made to point or illustrate
-political satires. To do full justice to these, one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xvi" id="Page_xvi">[xvi]</a></span>
-would need to be well versed in the history (other than
-the cricketing history) of the period. But enough
-has been said. One could not let such a gallery of
-old masters go without an attempt to do the showman
-for them in some feeble way. They need neither
-help nor apology. They are good enough to win off
-their own bat.</p>
-
-<p>In our modern instances we have been no less
-lucky: with Mr. Warner to bat, Mr. Jephson to
-bowl, Mr. Jessop to field, and the rest of the good
-company, we do not know that any other choice
-could have made our eleven better than it is; but
-after all, that is for the public to say; it is from the
-pavilion, not the players, that the applause should
-come.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xvii" id="Page_xvii">[xvii]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<h2 class="p4">CONTENTS</h2>
-
-<table id="toc" summary="cont">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdlh" colspan="2"><span class="small">CHAP.</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><span class="small">PAGE</span></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">1.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Some Points in Cricket History</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">2.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Early Developments of the Cricketing Art</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_29">29</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">3.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Batting</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_48">48</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">4.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Bowling</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_79">79</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">5.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Fielding</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_117">117</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">6.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">County Cricket</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_137">137</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">7.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Amateurs and Professionals</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_193">193</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">8.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Earlier Australian Cricket</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_217">217</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">9.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">English and Australian Cricket from 1894 to 1902</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_251">251</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">10.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">University Cricket</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_296">296</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">11.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Country-House Cricket</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_342">342</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">12.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Village Cricket</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_361">361</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">13.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Foreign Cricket</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_381">381</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">14.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Cricket in South Africa</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_396">396</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">15.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Cricket in New Zealand</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_409">409</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdrh">16.</td>
- <td class="tdt"><span class="smcap">Cricket Grounds</span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_415">415</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdlh" colspan="2">INDEX</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#Page_443">443</a></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xviii" id="Page_xviii">[xviii]</a><br /><a name="Page_xix" id="Page_xix">[xix]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-021.jpg" width="400" height="296"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS</h2>
-
-<table id="toi" summary="illustrations">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Tossing for Innings</td>
- <td class="tdrl" colspan="3"><a href="#fr"><span class="reduct"><i>Frontispiece</i></span></a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Cricket as played in the Artillery Ground,
-London, in 1743</td>
- <td class="tdrw" colspan="2"><span class="reduct"><i>To face page</i></span></td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i1">1</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Royal Academy Club in Marylebone
-Fields</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i2">2</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Match in Battersea Fields</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i3">3</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">An Exact Representation of the Game of
-Cricket</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i6">6</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Game of Cricket</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i16">16</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Cricket Field near White Conduit House</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i17">17</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Noble Game of Cricket</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i18">18</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Match on the Heath</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i29">29</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">“Cricket.” After the painting in Vauxhall Garden</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i36">36</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Ticket for a Cricket Match in 1744</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i40">40</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xx" id="Page_xx">[xx]</a></span></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">William and Thomas Earle</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i41">41</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Mr. James Henry Dark</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i44">44</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Mr. Thos. Hunt</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i45">45</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">“Block or Play”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i52">52</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">“Forward Play”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i53">53</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Draw or Pull</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i65">65</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Leg Volley</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i66">66</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Cut</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i67">67</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Eighteenth-Century Bats</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i70">70</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Celebrated Bats</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i71">71</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">War-worn Weapons</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i72">72</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Relics of Past Engagements</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i73">73</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">George Parr</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i74">74</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">N. Felix</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i75">75</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Bowler (Alfred Mynn)</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i79">79</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">William Lillywhite</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i84">84</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">John Wisden</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i85">85</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Alfred Mynn</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i92">92</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">James Cobbett</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i93">93</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">William Lillywhite</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i98">98</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">William Clarke, etc.</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i99">99</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Lord’s Ground early in the Nineteenth Century</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i106">106</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">One Arm and One Leg Match</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i107">107</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Match at the Gentlemen’s Club, White
-Conduit House, Islington</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i110">110</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Kennington Oval in 1849</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i117">117</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Cricket Field at Rugby</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i124">124</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Match in the Eighties</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i125">125</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Kent <i>v.</i> Sussex at Brighton</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i137">137</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Cricket Match (about 1756)</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i148">148</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xxi" id="Page_xxi">[xxi]</a></span></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Curious County Club Advertisement</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i152">152</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Grand Female Cricket Match</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i153">153</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Batsman (Fuller Pilch)</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i156">156</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">An Old “Play” Bill</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i174">174</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Rural Sports</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i182">182</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Cricket Ground at Darnall, near Sheffield</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i190">190</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Earl of March</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i193">193</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Mr. J. H. Dark, Hillyer, The Umpire Martingell</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i200">200</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Fuller Pilch</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i201">201</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Portrait of a Youth</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i208">208</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">William Doorinton</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i209">209</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">George Parr</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i214">214</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Thomas Box</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i222">222</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Dr. W. G. Grace</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i228">228</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Youth with a Cricket Bat</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i236">236</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">An Eleven of Miss Wickets</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i248">248</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Honourable Spencer Ponsonby</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i260">260</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Cricket Song</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i272">272</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Lyric of the Cricket Field</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i273">273</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Salvadore House, Tooting, Surrey</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i298">298</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Cricket Ground, Todmorden</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i299">299</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Cricket at Rugby in 1837</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i304">304</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Cambridge University Students playing Cricket, 1842</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i305">305</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Corinthians at Lord’s in 1822</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i320">320</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Match in 1805</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i328">328</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Miss Wicket and Miss Trigger</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i344">344</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Country-House Cricket Match</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i352">352</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Village Match in 1768</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i361">361</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xxii" id="Page_xxii">[xxii]</a></span></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">“‘Out,’ so don’t fatigue yourself, I beg, Sir!”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i370">370</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Cricketer</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i371">371</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Village Cricket in 1832</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i374">374</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Cricket at Hampton Wick</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i375">375</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">An Eighteenth-Century Caricature</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i381">381</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Parliamentary Match</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i386">386</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A Match at Igloolie between H.M. Ships <i>Fury</i> and <i>Hecla</i></td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i392">392</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">A State Match</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i398">398</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">The Soldier’s Widow or Schoolboys’ Collection</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i402">402</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Old Charlton Church and Manor House</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i415">415</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">Cricket’s Peaceful Weapons</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i432">432</a></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdt">At the End of the Innings (William Beldham)</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdcl">”</td>
- <td class="tdrl"><a href="#i433">433</a></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-026.jpg" width="400" height="242" id="i1"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc01" summary="c02">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Francis Hayman, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>CRICKET, AS PLAYED IN THE ARTILLERY GROUND, LONDON, IN 1743.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-027.jpg" width="400" height="307"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER I</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">SOME POINTS IN CRICKET HISTORY</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">The Editor</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">Cricket</span> began when first a man-monkey, instead of
-catching a cocoanut thrown him playfully by a
-fellow-anthropoid, hit it away from him with a stick
-which he chanced to be holding in his hand. But the
-date of this occurrence is not easy to ascertain, and
-therefore it is impossible to fix the date of the invention
-of cricket. For cricket has passed through so many
-stages of evolution before arriving at the phase in
-which we find it to-day that it is difficult to say when
-the name, as we understand its meaning, first became
-rightly applicable to it. The first use of the name
-“cricket” for any game is indeed a matter entirely of
-conjecture. It is not known precisely by Skeat, nor<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span>
-Strutt, nor Mr. Andrew Lang. But whether the
-name was applied by reason of the cricket or crooked
-stick, which was the early form of the bat, or whether
-from the cross stick used as a primitive bail, or from
-the cricket or stool, at which the bowler aimed the ball,
-really does not very much matter, for all these etymological
-vanities belong rather to the mythological age
-of cricket than the historical. Neither is it of great
-importance whether cricket was originally played under
-another name, such as club-ball, as Mr. Pycroft infers,
-on rather meagre authority, as it seems to me, from
-Nyren. Nyren did not hazard the inference. The
-fact is that the form in which we first find cricket
-played, and called cricket, is quite unlike our cricket
-of to-day, so that we do not need to go seeking anything
-by a different name. They played with two
-upright stumps, 1 foot high, 2 feet apart, with a
-cross stump over them and a hole dug beneath this
-cross stump. The cross stump is evidently the origin
-of our bails. Nyren does not believe in this kind of
-cricket, but he gives no reason for his disbelief, for
-the excellent reason that he can have had no reason
-for his scepticism; and the fact is proved by the
-evidence of old pictures. He was a simple, good
-man; he never saw anything like cricket played in
-that way, so he did not believe any one else ever had.
-He did not perhaps understand much about the law
-of evidence, but he wrote delightfully about cricket.
-The fourth edition of his guide, which a friend’s
-kindness has privileged me to see, is dated 1847,
-some time after the author’s death.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-029.jpg" width="400" height="266" id="i2"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc02" summary="c02">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>Engraved from a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Francis Hayman, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE ROYAL ACADEMY CLUB IN MARYLEBONE FIELDS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-030.jpg" width="400" height="221" id="i3"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A MATCH IN BATTERSEA FIELDS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Yes, in spite of Nyren, they bowled at this cross-stick
-and wicket which the ball could pass through
-again and again without removing the cross piece, and
-the recognised way of getting a man out was not so
-much to bowl him as to catch or run him out. You
-ran him out by getting the ball into the hole between
-the stumps before he got his bat there&mdash;making the
-game something like rounders. Fingers got such
-nasty knocks encountering the bat in a race for this
-hole that bails and a popping crease were substituted&mdash;at
-least the humane consideration is stated to
-have been a factor in the change.</p>
-
-<p>It is not to be supposed that even we, for all our
-legislation, have witnessed the final evolution of cricket.
-Legislate we never so often, something will always
-remain to be bettered&mdash;the width of the wicket or
-the law of the follow on. About the earliest records
-that have come down to us there is a notable incompleteness
-that we must certainly regret. The bowler
-gets no credit for wickets caught or stumped off his
-bowling. What would become of the analysis of the
-underhand bowler of to-day if wickets caught and
-stumped were not credited to him? But at the date
-of these early records all the bowling was of necessity
-underhand. Judge then of the degree in which those
-poor bowlers have been defrauded of their just rights.
-Whether or no the name of our great national game
-was derived from the “cricket” in the sense of the
-crooked stick used for defence of the wicket, it is
-certain, from the evidence of old pictures, if from
-nothing else, that crooked sticks, like the modern<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span>
-hockey sticks, filled, as best they might, the function
-of the bat. They are figured as long and narrow,
-with a curving lower end. There was no question in
-those days of the bat passing the four-inch gauge.
-They must have been very inferior, as weapons of
-defence for the wicket, to our modern bats&mdash;broomsticks
-rather than bats&mdash;more than excusing, when
-taken in connection with the rough ground, the
-smallness of the scores, even though the bowling was
-all underhand and, practically, there was no defence.
-The solution of these problems, however, is, I fear,
-buried in the mists of antiquity, and one scarcely dares
-even to hope for a solution of them, or the fixing of
-the date of the changes. There are other problems
-that do not seem as if they ought to be so hopelessly
-beyond our ken. In Nyren’s cricketer’s guide, one of
-the laws of cricket, therein quoted, provides that the
-wickets shall be pitched by the umpires, yet in part
-of his time, if not all of it&mdash;and when the change was
-made I cannot find out&mdash;it must have been the custom
-for the bowler to choose the pitch, for he records
-special praise of the chief bowler of the old Hambledon
-Club, that on choosing a wicket he would be guided
-not only by the kind of ground that would help him
-individually best, but also would take pains to see that
-the bowler from the other end had a nice bumping
-knob to pitch the ball on&mdash;for by this time “length”
-bowling, as it was called, had come into general use.
-Nyren’s words are that he “has with pleasure noticed
-the pains he&mdash;Harris&mdash;has taken in choosing the
-ground for his fellow-bowler as well as himself.”</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In 1774 there was a meeting, under the presidency
-of Sir William Draper, supported by the Duke of
-Dorset, the Earl of Tankerville, Sir Horace Mann,
-and other influential supporters of cricket, to draw up
-laws for the game, and therein it is stated that the
-“pitching of ye first wicket is to be determined by ye
-cast of a piece of money,” but it does not then say by
-whom they are to be pitched, nor does this function
-come within the province of the umpires as therein
-defined. This, therefore, is the first problem which I
-would ask the help of all cricketing readers towards
-solving&mdash;the date at which the pitching of the stumps
-ceased to be the business or privilege of the bowler.
-It was the introduction of “length” bowling, no
-doubt&mdash;previously it was all along the ground&mdash;real
-bowling as in bowls&mdash;that forced them to
-straighten the bats. Mr. Ward, in some memoranda
-which he gave Nyren, and which the latter quoted at
-large, says of these bats, used in a match that arose
-from a challenge on behalf of Kent County, issued
-by Lord John Sackville, to play All England in 1847:
-“The batting could neither have been of a high character,
-nor indeed safe, as may be gathered from the
-figure of the bat at that time, which was similar to an
-old-fashioned dinner-knife curved at back and sweeping
-in the form of a volute at the front and end. With
-such a bat the system must have been all for hitting;
-it would be barely possible to block, and when the
-practice of bowling length balls was introduced, and
-which (<i>sic</i>) gave the bowler so great an advantage in
-the game, it became absolutely necessary to change the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span>
-form of the bat in order that the striker might be able
-to keep pace with the improvement. It was therefore
-made straight in the pod, in consequence of which, a
-total revolution, it may be said a reformation too,
-ensued in the style of play.”</p>
-
-<p>Then follows a record of the score of the match,
-which need not be detailed. England made 40 and
-70, and Kent 53 and 58 for nine wickets, a gallant
-win. “Some years after this,” Mr. Ward continues&mdash;it
-is to be presumed Nyren quotes the <i>ipsissima
-verba</i>, for whenever he wants to put in anything off
-his own bat it appears above his initials in a note&mdash;“the
-fashion of the bat having been changed to a
-straight form, the system of blocking was adopted”&mdash;that
-is to say, some years after 1740.</p>
-
-<p>The date is vague. Let us say early in the second
-half of the eighteenth century, and I think we may
-go so far as to say that cricket, as we understand it,
-began then too. It can hardly have been cricket&mdash;this
-entirely aggressive batting. The next date of
-importance as marking an epoch, if we may speak of
-the next when we have left the last so much to conjecture,
-is 1775. On 22nd of May of that year there
-was a great match “in the Artillery Ground between
-five of the Hambledon Club and five of All England,
-when Small went in, the last man, for fourteen runs
-and fetched them. Lumpy”&mdash;a very famous bowler
-baptized Edward, surnamed Stevens&mdash;“was bowler
-upon the occasion, and it having been remarked that
-his balls had three times passed between Small’s
-stumps, it was considered to be a hard thing upon the
-bowler that his straightest ball should be so sacrificed;
-the number of the stumps was in consequence
-increased from two to three.”</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-035.jpg" width="400" height="257" id="i6"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc03" summary="c03">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>Engraved in 1743 by H. Roberts.</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>After L. P. Boitard.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>AN EXACT REPRESENTATION OF THE GAME OF CRICKET.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>That is plain enough, but what is not plain is the
-height of the stumps at that time.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Pycroft puts the height of the stumps at 1
-foot, with a width of only 6 inches, up to 1780, and
-it is evident from what Nyren says&mdash;(<i>a</i>) that he had
-never seen stumps of 1 foot high and 2 feet wide;
-and (<i>b</i>) that they were not of 22 inches high until
-1775. Therefore here is evidence in support of
-Mr. Pycroft’s 1 foot high and 6 inch wide wicket,
-to say nothing of the unimpeachable value of his own
-statements. But he himself adduces nothing that I
-can find in its support, nor does he attempt to give
-us the date of the first narrowing of the stumps; and
-with regard to the alteration from two low stumps to
-three 22-inch stumps I am obliged to find him at
-variance with Nyren.</p>
-
-<p>The point, therefore, that I want to light on is the
-date and circumstances of the change from wickets of
-two stumps 1 foot high and 2 feet apart, to wickets
-of two stumps 1 foot high, and only 6 inches apart.
-This very drastic change appears to have been accomplished
-without a word of historical comment upon it.
-There was a deal of discussion at the time of the introduction
-of the third stump about the probable effect
-on the game of this change, some arguing that it
-would shorten the game&mdash;that every one would get
-out quickly.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Ward took the opposite view, that it would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span>
-lead to more careful and improved batting, and cites
-a remarkable match played in 1777 between the
-Hambledon Club and All England, in which, despite
-the third stump, England made 100 and 69; and
-Hambledon, in a single innings, made the wonderful
-score of 403. Aylward, who seems to have gone in
-eighth wicket down, scored 167, individually, notwithstanding
-that he had the mighty “Lumpy” against
-him.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Ward’s memoranda therefore give us some
-interesting facts.</p>
-
-<p>So far as we can see back, the distance between
-the wickets has always been 22 yards, but up to
-about some time in the first half of the eighteenth
-century the wicket consisted of two stumps 1 foot
-high, 2 feet apart, with a cross stump, and a hole
-between them.</p>
-
-<p>Later, this was changed for two stumps, first of
-1 foot and then of 22 inches high, 6 inches apart,
-with a bail and a popping crease.</p>
-
-<p>About 1750 “length” bowling was introduced,
-superseding the all-along-the-ground business, and
-nearly concurrently the bats straightened instead of
-curved. And I think we can scarcely say “cricket”
-began before that, whatever “club-ball” or “stool-ball”
-may have done.</p>
-
-<p>In 1775 a third stump was added.</p>
-
-<p>This last date, I know, does not agree with Mr.
-Pycroft, but I cannot quite make out what his original
-sources are. He writes: “From an MS. my friend”&mdash;he
-has mentioned so many friends in the previous<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span>
-paragraph that it is impossible to identify the one he
-means&mdash;“received from the late Mr. William Ward,
-it appears that the wickets were placed 22 yards
-apart as long since as the year 1700. We are informed
-also that putting down the wickets, to make
-a man out in running, instead of the old custom of
-popping the ball into the hole, was adopted on account
-of severe injuries to the hands, and that the wicket
-was changed at the same time&mdash;1779-80&mdash;to the
-dimensions of 22 inches by 6, with a third stump
-added.” So, on the authority of the “MS. received
-by his friend”&mdash;it may have been the very memoranda
-given to Nyren, for Mr. Pycroft has mentioned
-Nyren in the preceding paragraph&mdash;Pycroft cites
-Ward as lumping together the double change from
-the two low stumps to the three higher stumps in
-1779-80, whereas, in his memoranda to Nyren, Mr.
-Ward distinctly names 1775 as the date at which
-the third stump was added.</p>
-
-<p>Curiously enough, Pycroft must have known all
-about this, really, but it slipped his memory, for, a
-page or two further, we find him quoting almost
-Nyren’s or Ward’s words: “In a match of the
-Hambledon Club in 1775, it was observed, at a critical
-point in the game, that the ball passed three times
-between Mr. Small’s two stumps without knocking
-off the bail, and then, first a third stump was added,
-and seeing that the new style of balls which rise over
-the bat rose also over the wickets, <i>then but 1 foot
-high</i>, the wicket was altered to the dimensions of
-22 inches by 8, and again, to its present dimensions<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span>
-of 27 inches by 8 in 1817.” Though I find all up
-to that point in Nyren, I do not find the italicised
-words, but I have no doubt they present the fact
-quite accurately. They tell us nothing, however,
-as to the date at which the wicket was first
-narrowed.</p>
-
-<p>Another curious piece of information Mr. Ward
-gives us, by the way. “Several years since&mdash;I do not
-recollect the precise date&mdash;a player named White, of
-Ryegate, brought a bat to a match which, being the
-width of the stumps, effectually defended his wicket
-from the bowler, and in consequence a law was passed
-limiting the future width of the bat to 4-1/4 inches.
-Another law also decreed that the ball should not
-weigh less than 5-1/2 oz. or more than 5-3/4 oz.” Nyren
-appends a note to this: “I have a perfect recollection
-of this occurrence, also that subsequently an iron
-frame, of the statute width, was constructed for,
-and kept by, the Hambledon Club, through which
-any bat of suspected dimensions was passed, and
-allowed or rejected accordingly.” “Several years
-since,” says Mr. Ward, or Nyren, writing, as I presume,
-about the year 1833, so that perhaps we may
-put this invention of the gauge about 1830, or a little
-earlier. I wonder who has this iron gauge now.
-Has it been sold up for old iron?</p>
-
-<p>That is a third very practical problem that one
-would like answered.</p>
-
-<p>And is it not curious to see how the rules were
-made and modified to meet the occasions as they
-arose. The misfortune of that</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="pp6 p1">Honest Lumpy who did ‘low,<br />
-He ne’er could bowl but o’er a brow&mdash;</p>
-
-<p class="pn1">in bowling so many times between the stumps of the
-too greatly blessed Small&mdash;whence the introduction
-of the third stump. And White with his barn-door
-bat, from “Ryegate,” as it pleases them to spell it,
-compelling the use of the gauge.</p>
-
-<p>We are too apt to think of the laws as “struck
-off at one time,” like the American Constitution,
-instead of regarding them as something of slow
-growth in the past, that will have to grow, with our
-growth, in the future. We shall get into trouble if
-we regard them as something too sacred to touch
-and do not legislate as occasion arises.</p>
-
-<p>We have altered them greatly since that meeting
-at the Star and Garter in Pall Mall in 1774, when
-they seem first to have been committed to writing,
-and by the end of the twentieth century it is likely
-that we shall have modified them considerably from
-this present form. We have a notion that our forefathers
-played the game in such a sportsmanlike
-manner, taking no possible advantage but such as
-was perfectly open and above-board, that they
-required scarcely any rules to guide them, but some
-sad things that the stern historian has to notice about
-the influence that betting had at one time on cricket&mdash;this,
-and also a sentence or two from these very
-memoranda of Mr. Ward, whom Nyren extols as the
-mirror of all cricketing chivalry&mdash;may show us, I
-think, that our cricketing forefathers had something
-human in them too. How is this for a piece of artful<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span>
-advice? “If you bring forward a fast bowler as a
-change, contrive, if fortune so favours you, that he
-shall bowl his first ball <i>when a cloud is passing over</i>,
-because, as this trifling circumstance frequently affects
-the sight of the striker, you may thereby stand a
-good chance of getting him out.” And again, a
-little lower on the same page: “Endeavour, by
-every means in your power&mdash;such as, by changing
-the bowling, by little alterations in the field, or by
-any excuse you can invent&mdash;to delay the time, that
-the strikers may become cold or inactive.”</p>
-
-<p>A very cunning cricketer, this Mr. Ward.</p>
-
-<p>Previously he had said: “If two players are well
-in, and warm with getting runs fast, and one should
-happen to be put out, supply his place immediately,
-lest the other become cold and stiff.” Now just
-compare these two last suggestions with each other,
-you will say, I think, that the last is fair and just
-and proper counsel, instilling a precaution that you
-have every right to take, but the former, according
-to the modern sense of what is right and sportsmanlike,
-seems to me to be counselling something
-perilously near the verge of sharp practice. You
-send your man out quickly, that the other may not
-grow cold, and what happens? Your purpose is
-defeated by the bowler and field purposely dawdling
-in order that the man <i>may</i> grow cold. It does not
-strike one as quite, quite right, though no doubt it
-is not against the rules. But it is tricky, a little
-tricky. And so again we draw a date, without his
-suspecting it, of a new moral epoch, from our invaluable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span>
-Mr. Ward. About 1833, or a little later, we grew
-a trifle more delicate and particular in some small
-points of cricketing behaviour and sportsmanlike
-dealing. The betting, and the like evil practices at
-one time connected with the game, were a grosser
-scandal which carried their own destruction with
-them.</p>
-
-<p>If any man, therefore, can throw light on these
-three dark points, I shall be very grateful to him&mdash;the
-date at which the first high wicket was narrowed
-down to 6 inches, the date at which the bowler
-ceased to have the pitching of the wicket, and the
-present habitation of that famous piece of old iron,
-the gauge used on the barn-door bat of White of
-Ryegate. Nyren, the matchless historian of the
-game, reveals himself, in his little history, as a very
-estimable man, of some matchless qualities for his
-task&mdash;an unbounded love of his subject and a sweet
-nature perfectly free of the slightest taint of jealousy.
-He writes of no other cricketing societies, except
-incidentally, than of those men of Hambledon in
-Hampshire. <i>Quorum pars magna fui</i>, as he says, with
-a single explosion of very proper pride, and a note
-appended thereto explaining apologetically that he
-has some certain knowledge of Latin. But after this
-single expression, very fully justified, for he was the
-beloved father of the Hambledon Club for years, he
-speaks of himself again hardly at all, just as if he
-had no hand in its successes, preferring to find some
-generous word to say of all the rest&mdash;of Beldham,
-Harris, Aylward, Lumpy. Beldham was not nearly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span>
-so handsome to him, speaking of him to Mr. Pycroft.
-“Old Nyren was not half a player as we reckon
-now,” was Beldham’s verdict. However, the old
-man was fifty then.</p>
-
-<p>At least he was a very good type of an Englishman
-and cricketer, whatever his class as a player, or he
-could never have written that book. And how much
-Hambledon may have owed to Nyren we can never
-know. As it is, Hambledon has the credit that
-Nyren specially claims for it of being the <i>Attica</i>, the
-centre of early civilisation, of the cricketing world.
-But there may have been other Atticas&mdash;only, like
-the brave men before Agamemnon, unsung, for want
-of their Homeric Nyrens.</p>
-
-<p>The fact of the matter is, we know little but
-gossip of how the cricket world went before the
-year 1786, when Bentley takes up the running and
-records the scores. A sad fire occurred in the M.C.C.
-Pavilion&mdash;at that time the Club played where the
-Regent’s canal now runs, after being built out of
-Dorset Square&mdash;and burnt all the old score books&mdash;irreparable
-loss.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Pycroft made an excursion into the home of
-the Beldhams, and brought out much valuable gossip,
-along with the unhandsome criticism on Nyren. “In
-those days,” says Beldham&mdash;1780, when Mr. Beldham
-was a boy&mdash;“the Hambledon Club could beat all
-England, but our three parishes around Farnham at
-last beat Hambledon.”</p>
-
-<p>“It is quite evident,” adds Mr. Pycroft to this,
-“that Farnham was the cradle of cricket.”</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Something that Beldham and others may have
-said to Mr. Pycroft may have made this fact “quite
-evident” to him, but I cannot see that he has transmitted
-any such evidence to us. This much, however,
-I think we may say with confidence, that all
-that was best of cricketing tradition and practice <i>in
-the south of England</i>&mdash;that is to say, as far as was in
-touch at all with its influences&mdash;clustered in the little
-corner of Surrey in which the parish of Farnham is.
-But that is not to say that there were not other nuclei
-of cricket in the north and elsewhere, and I think
-there is evidence to lead us to think there were other
-centres, perhaps less energetic.</p>
-
-<p>The “county” boundaries were not so rigid in
-those days. “You find us regularly,” says Beldham
-to Mr. Pycroft&mdash;“us” being Farnham and thereabouts&mdash;“on
-the Hampshire side in Bentley’s book,”
-and it is quite true.</p>
-
-<p>Then, from this little nucleus, cricket in the south
-extended. Beldham had a poor opinion of the cricket
-of Kent at first. Crawte, one of the best Kent men,
-was “stolen away from us,” in Beldham’s words.
-Aylward, the hero of the 167 runs, was taken, also
-to Kent, by Sir Horace Mann, as his bailiff, but
-“the best bat made but a poor bailiff, we heard.”
-Sussex was a cricketing county from an early date,
-but Beldham had a poor opinion of its powers
-likewise.</p>
-
-<p>The elements of the nucleus formed round
-Farnham were disseminated, as much as anything,
-by the support that certain rich and influential people<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span>
-gave the game. We have seen how Sir Horace
-Mann stole away Aylward. Other great supporters
-of the game were Earl Darnley, Earl Winchelsea,
-Mr. Paulet, and Mr. East&mdash;all before the centuries
-had turned into the eighteens.</p>
-
-<p>“Kent and England,” says Mr. Pycroft, “was as
-good an annual match in the last as in the present
-century.” But in those days, as even his own later
-words show us, “Kent,” so called, sometimes had
-three of the best All England men given in, even
-in a match against “England.” They were not so
-particular then&mdash;what they wanted was a jolly good
-game, with a good stake on it.</p>
-
-<p>“The White Conduit Fields and the Artillery
-Ground,” Pycroft goes on, “supplied the place of
-Lord’s, though in 1817 the name of Lord’s is found
-in Bentley’s matches, implying, of course, the old
-Marylebone Square, now Dorset Square, under
-Thomas Lord, and not the present, by St. John’s
-Wood, more properly deserving the name of Dark’s
-than Lord’s. The Kentish battlefields were Sevenoaks&mdash;the
-land of Clout, one of the original makers
-of cricket balls&mdash;Coxheath, Dandelion Fields, in the
-Isle of Thanet, and Cobham Park, also Dartford
-Brent and Pennenden Heath; there is also early
-mention of Gravesend, Rochester, and Woolwich.
-The Holt, near Farnham, and Moulsey Hurst, were
-the Surrey grounds.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-047.jpg" width="400" height="243" id="i16"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>THE GAME OF CRICKET</i>.</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-048.jpg" width="400" height="241" id="i17"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc04" summary="c04">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From an Engraving.</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Published in 1787.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE CRICKET FIELD NEAR WHITE CONDUIT HOUSE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>But there was cricket further afield. In 1790 the
-Brighton men were playing, and in the following
-year we find an eleven of old Etonians, with four
-players given, playing the M.C.C. team; also with
-four professionals, in Rutlandshire. This M.C.C.
-team went on to play eleven “yeomen and artisans
-of Leicester,” defeating them sorely, and in the same
-year the Nottingham men met with a similar fate at
-the hands of the Club.</p>
-
-<p>From these matches and their results we are now
-able, I think, to infer two things&mdash;first, that cricket
-had been played for some long while, not as an
-imported invention, but as an aboriginal growth, in
-these northern counties before these teams visited
-them from the south, and secondly, that the southern
-counties had brought it to a much higher pitch of
-perfection, for they could never have gone down so
-ninepinlike before any eleven of the Marylebone
-Club. Likely enough the inspired doctrine, of the
-straight bat and the left elbow up, of that gifted
-baker of gingerbread, Harry Hall of Farnham, had
-not travelled so far as the home of these northern
-folk, and in that case they would have been at a
-parlous disadvantage to those who had been brought
-up by its lights. They had not perhaps been so long
-in the habit of coping with “length” balls, which
-made the adoption of the left elbow up almost a
-necessity of defence. When the bowling came all
-along the ground it did not matter. Also there was
-in the south that prince of bowlers, Harris, whose
-magical deliveries shot up so straightly from the
-ground that it was almost essential for playing them
-to get out to the pitch of the ball. And if they
-had not this bowling, what was to educate them,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>
-unassisted, to a higher standard of batting? But they
-were not left unassisted, for the masterly elevens from
-the south began to come among them, and taught
-them many things, no doubt, both by example and
-by precept.</p>
-
-<p>This was in 1791. 1793 brings a wider ray of
-light on the scene of cricket history. Essex and
-Herts come on the scene as cricketing counties&mdash;of
-second class, as we should call them now, to Kent
-and Surrey, but players and lovers of cricket all the
-same. They combined elevens apparently, and played
-twenty-two against an eleven of England, which beat
-them in a single innings. Mr. Pycroft has a specially
-interesting note in this connection. He was told by
-two old cricketers, one a Kent man and the other an
-Essex man, that when they were boys, cricket in both
-these counties was a game of the village, rather than
-of clubs. “There was a cricket bat behind the door,
-or else up in the bacon rack, in every cottage.” Of
-course in London it was a game played in clubs, for
-they only could find the spaces where land was
-valuable. It was in the year of 1793 that “eleven
-yeomen at Oldfield Bray, in Berkshire, had learned
-enough to be able to defeat a good eleven of the
-Marylebone Club.”</p>
-
-<p>I am scandalised by the wholesale way I have to
-steal early history from Mr. Pycroft’s book. The
-only excuse is that I do not know where to go to
-better it, though probably I may supplement it from
-chance sources.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-051.jpg" width="400" height="315" id="i18"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
- <p class="pcap">The LAWS of the NOBLE GAME of CRICKET.</p>
- <p class="pcapn small">as revised by the Club at S<sup>t</sup>. Mary-le-bone.</p>
- <p class="pcapn small"><i>From the Frontispiece to the Laws.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In 1795 he tells us of matches in which the
-captains were respectively the Hon. Colonel Lennox&mdash;who
-fought a duel with the Duke of York&mdash;and the
-Earl of Winchelsea. A munificent supporter of the
-game was my Lord of Winchelsea, and used to rig
-out his merry men in suits of knee-breeches, shirts,
-hosen, and silver caps. It was a kind of feudal age of
-cricket, when the great captains prided themselves on
-the powers of their retainers, and staked largely on
-the result.</p>
-
-<p>“In 1797,” says Pycroft, “the Montpelier Club
-and ground attract our notice,” and then goes
-on to speak of Swaffham in Norfolk, as a country
-of keen but not very successful cricketers. Lord
-Frederick Beauclerk took down an eleven that
-appears to have beaten three elevens combined of
-the Norfolk folk, and that in a single innings. This
-Lord Frederick Beauclerk, with the Hon. H. and
-Hon. J. Tufton, got up the first Gents <i>v.</i> Players
-match in 1798; but though the Gents, after the
-generous fashion of the day, were reinforced by the
-three chief flowers of the professional flock&mdash;namely,
-Tom Walker, Beldham, and Hammond&mdash;the Players
-beat them. In the same year Kent essayed to play
-England, only to be beaten into little pieces, and in
-1800 they began the new century more modestly by
-playing with twenty-three men against twelve of
-England.</p>
-
-<p>For of course, after all has been said, the centre
-of the national game, as of everything national, was
-then, as now, smoky London. Lord’s Pavilion was
-then, as it had been since 1787, on the site that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span>
-Dorset Square occupies now. In London the men
-collected who loved cricket, and had the money to
-bet on the game and to engage the services of the
-players. There were keener cricketers, more general
-interest in cricket, then than a little later in the
-century. Three to four thousand spectators sometimes
-came to see a match at Lord’s, and royalties
-sometimes took a hand in the game.</p>
-
-<p>In the first years of the new century, Surrey was
-the great cricketing county. Only two of the All
-England eleven, Lord Frederick Beauclerk and
-Hammond, came from any other county. Hammond
-was wicket-keeper to the famous Homerton Club&mdash;“the
-best,” says Mr. Ward, quoted by Pycroft, “we
-ever had. Hammond played till his sixtieth year,
-but Brown and Osbaldestone put all wicket-keeping
-to the rout”&mdash;by the pace of their bowling, of course.</p>
-
-<p>About the first decade of the century the counties
-seem to have been divided off more strictly, for
-cricketing purposes, than before. Hampshire and
-Surrey, as we saw, ran in double harness, the men of
-Hants helping Surrey in a match, and the Surreyites
-mutually helping Hampshire. But now they no
-longer play together. Broadhalfpenny and even
-Windmill Down have gone to thistles, and the
-gallant Hambledon Club is no more. Godalming
-is mentioned as the strongest local centre of the
-game, and in 1808 Surrey had the glory of twice
-beating England in one season. But in 1821 the
-M.C.C. is again playing the “three parishes,”
-Godalming, Farnham, and Hartley Row, and it is in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span>
-the accounts of this very same year that we tumble
-on a dark and significant observation. “About this
-time,” said Beldham to Mr. Pycroft, “we played the
-Coronation match, M.C.C. against the Players of
-England. We scored 278 and only six wickets
-down, when the game was given up. I was hurt,
-and could not run my notches; still James Bland and
-the other Legs begged of me to take pains, for it
-was no sporting match, ‘any odds and no takers,’
-and they wanted to shame the gentlemen against
-wasting their&mdash;the Legs’&mdash;time in the same way
-another time.”</p>
-
-<p>“James Bland and the other Legs.” At this
-distance of time we may perhaps repeat the epithet
-or nickname, and even class a named man under it,
-without the risk of an action for libel. Perhaps
-even the term “Legs” did not imply all the qualities
-which attach to it to-day, but in any case it is surely
-something of a shock to come on the presence of
-these questionable gentlemen just casually stated, not
-with any note of surprise, but merely as if they were
-a common and even essential accompaniment of a
-cricket match.</p>
-
-<p>Of course we knew quite well that our forefathers
-betted large stakes between themselves, often on
-single-wicket matches. This was a favourite style of
-match with Mr. Osbaldestone&mdash;the Squire,&mdash;because
-his bowling was so fast that no one, practically, could
-hit it in front of the wicket, and hits did not count
-for runs, in single-wicket, behind the wicket. In
-double-wicket matches he often “beat his side,” we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span>
-are told&mdash;beat his own side&mdash;“by byes,” no long-stop
-being able to stop his bowling effectively. The chief
-check to the Squire’s career seems to have been the
-discovery of the famous Browne of Brighton, who
-bowled, some said, even faster. Beldham, however,
-made a lot of runs off the latter on one special
-occasion. This is a digression, into which the consideration
-of single-wicket matches for money&mdash;and
-is it a wonder we do not have more of them now?&mdash;beguiled
-me. But perhaps it is a good thing that we
-do not have them, for they may well have been the
-root and source of all the subsequent “leg-work.”
-The Coronation match is the first occasion on which
-Mr. Pycroft notices the “Legs,” in his order of
-writing, but lower down on the very same page he
-quotes some words of Mr. Budd, who shared, with
-Lord Frederick Beauclerk, the credit of being the
-best amateur cricketer of the day, relative to a match
-at Nottingham&mdash;M.C.C. <i>v.</i> Twenty-two of Notts&mdash;in
-which the same evil influence is apparent. “In
-that match,” he says, “Clarke played”&mdash;the future
-captain of the All England travelling team. “In
-common with others, I lost my money, and was
-greatly disappointed at the termination. <i>One paid
-player was accused of selling</i>, and <i>never employed
-after</i>.”</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Budd must have done his level best to avert
-defeat, too, for Bentley records that he caught out no
-less than nine of the Notts men; but <i>one paid player
-was accused of selling</i>, and Clarke was on the other
-side! However it happened, Notts won. Mr.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span>
-Pycroft also says that in old Nyren’s day the big
-matches were always made for £500 a side, apart, as
-we may presume, from outside betting. Nowadays a
-sovereign or a fiver on the ‘Varsity match is about
-the extent of the gambling that cricket invites.
-The James Bland referred to above had a brother,
-Joe&mdash;<i>Arcades ambo</i>, bookmakers both. These,
-with “Dick Whittom of Covent Garden&mdash;profession
-unnamed,&mdash;Simpson, a gaming-house keeper, and
-Toll of Esher, as regularly attended at a match as
-Crockford and Gully at Epsom and Ascot.”</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Pycroft scouts the idea that a simple-minded
-rustic of Surrey or Hampshire would long hold out
-against the inducements that these gentry would
-offer them, “at the Green Man and Still,” to sell a
-match, and indeed some of the naïve revelations that
-were made to him by rustic senility when he went to
-gossip with it, over brandy and water, might confirm
-him in a poor opinion of the local virtue.</p>
-
-<p>“I’ll tell the truth,” says one, whom he describes
-as a “fine old man,” but leaves in kindly anonymity.
-“One match of the county I did sell, a match made
-by Mr. Osbaldeston at Nottingham. I had been sold
-out of a match just before, and lost £10, and happening
-to hear it, I joined two others of our eleven to
-sell, and get back my money. I won £10 exactly,
-and of this roguery no one ever suspected me; but
-many was the time I have been blamed for selling
-when as innocent as a babe.” Then this old innocent,
-with his delightful notions of <i>cavalleria rusticana</i> and
-the wooing back of his £10, goes on to tell the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span>
-means&mdash;hackneyed enough in themselves&mdash;by which
-the company of the Legs seduced the obstinacy of
-rustic virtue. “If I had fifty sons,” he said, “I
-would never put one of them, for all the games in
-the world, in the way of the roguery that I have
-witnessed. The temptation was really very great&mdash;too
-great by far for any poor man to be exposed to.”</p>
-
-<p>There is a pathetic dignity about this simple moralising
-that contrasts well with the levity of his previous
-confession, but the state of things that it shows is
-really very disgusting. It is another tribute to the
-merit of this first of English games that it should
-have lived through and have lived down such a
-morbid condition.</p>
-
-<p>“If gentlemen wanted to bet,” said Beldham, “just
-under the pavilion sat men ready, with money down,
-to give and take the current odds. These were by
-far the best men to bet with, because, if they lost, it
-was all in the way of business; they paid their money
-and did not grumble.” The manners of some of
-the fraternity must have changed, not greatly for the
-better, since then. “Still,” he continues, “they had
-all sorts of tricks to make their betting safe.” And
-then he quotes, or Mr. Pycroft quotes&mdash;it is not
-very clear, and does not signify&mdash;Mr. Ward as
-saying, “One artifice was to keep a player out of the
-way by a false report that his wife was dead.” It
-was as clever a piece of practical humour as it was
-honest. What a monstrous state of things it reveals!</p>
-
-<p>And then Beldham, inspirited by Mr. Pycroft’s
-geniality and brandy and water, goes on to assure him&mdash;as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span>
-one who takes a view which the majority would
-condemn as childishly charitable&mdash;that he really does
-not believe, in spite of all that has been said, that
-any “gentleman,” by which he means “amateur,” has
-ever been known to sell a match, and he cites an
-instance in which for curiosity’s sake he put the
-honesty of a certain noble lord to the test by covertly
-proposing selling a match to him. But though his
-lordship, who seems to have been betting against his
-own side, had actually £100 on the match, even this
-inducement was not enough to tempt the nobleman
-from the paths of virtue.</p>
-
-<p>We will hope that no amateur did fall, and may
-join with Beldham in “believing it impossible,” but
-the fiction that they did was used by the Legs to
-persuade any man of difficult honesty to go crooked.
-“Serve them as they serve you,” was the argument,
-or one of the arguments, used. That “fine old man”
-whom Mr. Pycroft drew out so freely gives no edifying
-pictures of the players of the day: “Merry
-company of cricketers, all the men whose names I had
-ever heard as foremost in the game, met together,
-drinking, card-playing, betting, and singing, at the
-Green Man&mdash;that was the great cricketers’ house&mdash;in
-Oxford Street&mdash;no man without his wine, I assure
-you, and such suppers as three guineas a game to lose
-and five to win&mdash;that was then the sum for players&mdash;could
-never pay for long.”</p>
-
-<p>That was their rate of payment, and that their
-mode of life&mdash;perhaps not the best fitted for the
-clear eye and the sound wind.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>It appears that this degrading condition of cricket
-was brought to an end by its own excesses; it
-became a crying scandal. “Two very big rogues at
-Lord’s fell a-quarrelling.” They charged each other
-with all sorts of iniquities in the way of selling
-matches, all of which accusations, when compared
-with the records, squared so nicely with the truth that
-they carried conviction, and “opened the gentlemen’s
-eyes too wide to close again to those practices.”</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Pycroft has a note on his own account about
-the match at Nottingham in which his informant
-confessed to him that he was paid to lose. There
-were men on the other side who were paid to lose
-too, but, perhaps because there were twenty-two of
-them, they could not do it, but won in their own
-despite.</p>
-
-<p>It must have produced funny cricket, this selling
-of a match both ways, and Mr. Pycroft picked up a
-story of a single-wicket match in which both were
-playing to lose, where it was only by accident that a
-straight ball ever was bowled, but when it came it was
-always fatal. It reminds us of the much-discussed
-wides and no-balls bowled in the ‘Varsity match to
-avert the follow-on: but, thank heaven, there is no
-suspicion of fraudulent financial motives in even the
-queerest of cricketing tactics to-day.</p>
-
-<p>It is truly wonderful how all heavy betting has
-gone out. Partly, no doubt, this is because men play
-more in clubs. When individuals used to get up
-matches the players’ expenses came very heavy;
-therefore they made the matches for a considerable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span>
-stake to cover them, but the practice cannot have
-comforted the losers much. Nowadays the club
-pays players out of the subscribed funds.</p>
-
-<p>Why the single-wicket game is all given up is
-hard to say, for it is an age of individual emulation,
-but we are content with the better part of the game
-of eleven aside. And when first was that number,
-which seems to have some constant attraction for the
-cricketer, introduced? We cannot tell. It seems
-usual from the dawn of history. Moreover, the
-length of the pitch was always, so far as the historic
-eye can pierce, twenty-two yards&mdash;twice eleven, and
-twice eleven inches was the height of the stumps when
-they were first raised from the foot-high wicket.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Budd told Mr. Pycroft of a curious single-wicket
-match in which he was something more than
-<i>magna</i>, even <i>maxima</i>, <i>pars</i>. It was against Mr.
-Braund, for fifty guineas. Mr. Braund was a
-tremendously fast bowler. “I went in first, and,
-scoring seventy runs, with some severe blows on the
-legs&mdash;nankin knees and silk stockings, and no pads in
-those days&mdash;I consulted my friend and knocked down
-my wicket, lest the match should last to the morrow,
-and I be unable to play”&mdash;on account of the injuries
-to his nankin knees, I suppose. “Mr. Braund was
-out without a run. I went in again, and making the
-seventy up to a hundred, I once more knocked down
-my own wicket, and once more my opponent failed
-to score.”</p>
-
-<p>Another interesting match that Mr. Pycroft
-records was Mr. Osbaldeston and William Lambert<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span>
-against Lord Frederick Beauclerk and Beldham. Mr.
-Osbaldeston, on the morning of the match, which was
-fixed under “play or pay” conditions, found himself
-too ill to play, so Lambert tackled the two of them,
-and actually beat them. I am sorry to say I find a
-record of a little temper shown&mdash;perhaps naturally
-enough&mdash;in this match, as on another occasion, when
-he was bowling to that barn-door bat of the
-Hambledon Club, Tom Walker, by Lord Frederick
-Beauclerk; but after all, what man is worth his salt
-without a temper? And no doubt both occasions
-were very trying.</p>
-
-<p>The date of these single-wicket matches was about
-1820, which brings matters up to about the time at
-which a stopper should be put on the mouth of this
-gossiping and cribbing Muse of History, for we are
-coming to the days as to which men still living are
-able to tell us the things that they have seen.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-064.jpg" width="400" height="298" id="i29"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc05" summary="c05">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>James Pollard.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>A MATCH ON THE HEATH.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-065.jpg" width="400" height="315"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap">The LAWS of the NOBLE GAME of CRICKET</p>
- <p class="pcapn">as revised by the Club at S<sup>t</sup>. Mary-le-bone.</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER II</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">EARLY DEVELOPMENTS OF THE CRICKETING ART</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">The Editor</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">When</span> I first formed the presumptuous design of
-editing this work, it was my original purpose to
-divide this chapter into two parts, whereof the one
-should treat of the development of batting and the
-other of the development of bowling. But I very
-soon found that such a division would never do,
-for it would be a dividing of two things that were in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span>
-their nature indivisible, from the historian’s point of
-view, the one being the correlative of the other, and
-the effects of the one upon the other being ever constant.
-Of course those effects have been mutual; the
-bowling has educated the batting, and in his turn,
-again, the batsman has been the instructor of the
-bowler. No sooner has the one changed his tactics
-at all than the other has changed front a little in
-order to meet this new attack. Naturally, perhaps,
-it seems that the bowler has the oftener taught the
-batsman, than <i>vice versa</i>; the aggressor, by a new
-form of attack, forcing on the defendant a new line
-of defence. I think it is the generally accepted view
-to-day that it is the bowling “that makes the batting,”
-but on the other hand one is inclined to think that
-the excellence of the Australian bowling, and also of
-their wicket-keeping and general fielding, is very
-much the result of playing on such perfect wickets
-that the batsman practically would never get out
-unless fielding, wicket-keeping, and bowling were all
-of the highest quality. Therefore, in that special
-instance it may rather be said that the batting, under
-specially favourable conditions of climate and wickets,
-has “made the bowling.” Of course the natural
-effect of playing on perfect wickets in matches that
-last as many days as you please has had its effect, and
-to us not altogether a pleasing effect, on the Australian
-batting, but this is scarcely the place to consider that
-feature of the case.</p>
-
-<p>The first point of interest to notice is that Beldham
-is quite at one with us in attributing the advance in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span>
-batting to the advance of bowling, notably to the
-wonderful bowling of Harris, which was of that
-portentous character to which the name of epoch-making
-is not misapplied, and Nyren is of the
-same opinion with Beldham, whom he considers to
-have been the first to play Harris’s bowling with
-success by getting out to it at the pitch.</p>
-
-<p>We have seen, in another part of the book, that,
-setting aside the stool-ball, and the other legendary
-sports of the ancients, which were “not cricket,” the
-first game worthy of the name of cricket that appears
-in the dim twilight of history is the game they played
-at the beginning of the eighteenth century&mdash;say for
-simplicity’s sake in 1700. In 1700 and for some time
-later the wicket that men bowled at was formed, as we
-have seen, of two stumps, each 1 foot high, 2 feet apart,
-and with a cross-stump by way of a bail laid from one
-to the other. Between the two stumps, and below
-the cross one, was a hole scraped in the ground&mdash;the
-primitive block-hole. There was no popping-crease:
-the batsman grounded his bat by thrusting the end
-of the bat into the block-hole. Then he was “in his
-ground.” But if the wicket-keeper, or any fieldsman,
-could put the ball into the hole before the batsman
-had his bat grounded in it, the batsman was out.
-Observe, it was not a matter of knocking off the
-cross-stump with the ball, but of getting the ball into
-the hole before the batsman grounded his bat in it.
-It takes no very vivid imagination to picture the
-bruised and bloody fingers that must have resulted
-from the violent contact of the bat when there was a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span>
-race for the block-hole between wicket-keeper and
-batsman.</p>
-
-<p>And the bowling? The bowling of course was
-<i>bowling</i>, all along the ground, as in the famous old
-game of bowls. Very likely it was in some respects
-the best sort of bowling for the business. With a
-wicket only a foot high, anything between the longest
-of long-hops or the yorkiest of yorkers would have
-jumped over it. They found out this disadvantage
-later, when they began to bowl “length” balls,
-which, after all is said, must have been far the more
-puzzling for the batsman. And besides the chance
-of going over the wicket, there was also the excellent
-opportunity of going through the wicket, between
-two stumps set as far apart as 2 feet. Probably
-this occurred so often that it did not seem particularly
-hard luck. The batsman, more probably, deemed
-himself very hardly used if he did not get two or
-three extra lives of this grace.</p>
-
-<p>And after all, though no records that I can find
-have come down to us from those times, it is safe to
-infer that the batsmen did not make an overwhelming
-number of runs. Had it been so we should
-almost certainly have heard of it by oral tradition,
-and Aylward’s great score of 167 at the end of the
-century would not have stood out as such a unique
-effort. Nor have we far to seek for the reason that
-the scores were not prodigious. Though the wicket
-was low, it was very broad, and a ball running over
-the surface of bumpy ground, as we may suppose
-those wickets to have been, would very often have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span>
-taken off the cross-stump only a foot above the
-ground. Perhaps, even, at a foot high it was more
-assailable than at two feet by these methods of attack.
-Then too the weapons of defence&mdash;the bats, so to call
-them&mdash;are figured more like the hockey-sticks of
-to-day&mdash;“curved at the back, and sweeping in the
-form of a volute at the front and end,” Mr. Ward’s
-memoranda of Nyren say. Of course these were
-very inadequate weapons of defence, and in point of
-fact no defence seems ever to have been attempted.
-It was all hit. And for actual hitting of a ball
-always on the ground a bat of this shape may not
-have been so very ill adapted after all.</p>
-
-<p>We do not know what the wiles of these old all-along-the-ground
-bowlers may have been. Probably
-they were fairly simple. Yet there is a significant
-word that crops up in the pages of Pycroft, that delightful
-writer, that almost inclines one to suspect these
-old-fashioned fellows of some guile. He constantly
-uses the expression “bias” bowling. He speaks
-of it, it is true, in connection with “length” balls,
-breaking from the pitch. But why should he have
-used the word “bias” unless it were in common
-parlance, and how should that singular word have
-come into common parlance unless from the analogy
-of the game of bowls, in which it is a cant term. In
-the game of bowls the bowls are sometimes weighted
-on one side, for convenience in making them roll round
-in a curve and so circumvent another bowl that may
-“stimy” them, to borrow a term from golf, from
-the jack; but sometimes&mdash;and this seems a more<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span>
-scientific form of the game&mdash;there is no bias in the
-bowl itself, but “side” can be communicated to it,
-by a finished player, with the same result as before.
-Now if it was the habit of these old-fashioned
-cricketers to bowl their “daisy-cutters” with bias on
-the ball, so that it would travel in a curve as it came
-along, the reason for the term as used by Pycroft is
-simple enough; but if this is not the explanation, the
-only alternative one is that the term first came into
-use&mdash;never having been mentioned in cricket before&mdash;for
-balls that broke from the pitch, wherein the
-analogy from bowls would be very far-fetched indeed,
-and the term altogether not one that would be
-likely to suggest itself. Therefore I think there is
-a likelihood&mdash;I claim no more for my inference&mdash;that
-these old cricketers bowled their underhand
-sneaks with spin on them, just as we often have
-seen them bowled&mdash;and a very good ball too
-on a rough wicket&mdash;in country cricket matches
-to-day.</p>
-
-<p>Then we come to a change, and the date of that
-change appears to involve some of the highest authorities
-in a certain disagreement. But I am going to
-stick to Nyren, or rather to Mr. Ward’s memoranda
-as edited by Nyren, rather than to Pycroft, both
-because the former wrote nearer to the date of the
-occurrences treated of, and also because the latter&mdash;though
-I love and revere his book&mdash;seems to me to
-have lumped dates together in a certain scornful,
-contemptuous haste, as if they were scarcely worth a
-good cricketer’s attention. Nyren, or Mr. Ward for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span>
-him, is more careful in his discrimination, according
-to my judgment as a grave historian.</p>
-
-<p>According to Nyren, then, it was some time about
-or before 1746 that the stumps were both heightened
-and narrowed. From 1 foot they sprang up to
-22 inches in height, and from 2 feet across they
-shrank to as little as 6 inches in width. A bail
-crossed their tops, and a popping-crease was drawn
-for the grounding of the bat, to the great saving,
-as we cannot doubt, of the wicket-keeper’s fingers.
-Still, however, unless Nyren was mistaken, there
-were not as yet but two stumps&mdash;virtually it is certain
-he was mistaken in declining to believe that the game
-ever was played with a wicket of 2 feet width, but
-that does not prove him wrong in another matter in
-which all the probabilities are in his favour.</p>
-
-<p>We are not given any very clear reason for this
-change in the height of wickets, but we very quickly
-see its effects. Hitherto bowling had been all along
-the ground, the wicket being so low that it was
-almost necessary to bowl in this now derided fashion
-if it was to be hit at all. But a wicket 10 inches
-higher might have its bail taken off by a higher-rising
-ball, the higher-rising ball was found to be a more
-difficult one for the batsman to hit, the higher-rising
-kind of ball was thereby proved the best for the
-bowler’s purpose; in a word, “length” bowling, as
-they called it&mdash;the bowling of good length balls, as
-we should say&mdash;was introduced.</p>
-
-<p>And now, all at once, the position of the unfortunate
-batsman was found to be a very parlous one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span>
-indeed. For, remember, he had in his hand, to meet
-this bowling, a thing that had more resemblance to a
-hockey-stick than a cricket-bat. There is a certain
-“invisible length” which, as we all know, is extremely
-difficult to play with a modern square-faced bat and
-with all the science of modern theories of wielding it.
-How much more helpless then, as Euclid would put
-it, must the unfortunate man with the bandy-stick
-have felt when he saw coming towards him through
-the air a ball of that length which he knew would
-make it impossible when it reached him. Batsmen
-must have had a most miserable time of it for a year
-or two.</p>
-
-<p>At length, out of their necessity was produced a
-new invention. It was about the year 1750 that the
-“length” bowling came into fashion, and very soon
-afterwards the form of the cricket-bat was altered to
-that straight and square-faced aspect which gave it
-a chance of meeting the new bowling&mdash;which was
-assailing comparatively new wickets&mdash;on equal terms.
-Obviously there ought to be some kind of relation
-between the shape of the bat and the contour of
-the wicket that it is concerned to defend, and the
-contour of the upright 22-inch wicket demanded
-defence by a straight bat&mdash;that is to say, at first,
-merely a bat straight in itself. The gospel of the left
-elbow up and the meeting of the ball with bat at the
-perpendicular had not been preached thus early.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-072.jpg" width="400" height="296" id="i36"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc06" summary="c06">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>Engraved by Benoist</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>After F. Hayman, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>CRICKET, “AFTER THE PAINTING IN VAUXHALL GARDEN.”</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>And I take it that virtually cricket, worthy to be
-called by any such great name, did not really begin
-before this. This game of trundling along the
-ground at a two-foot wide wicket, and a man with a
-hockey-stick defending it, is really rather a travesty
-of the great and glorious game. The origin of
-cricket it was, no doubt, and as such is to be most
-piously revered, but actual cricket&mdash;hardly. Consider
-that old print of a game in progress on the
-Artillery Fields, where the players are equipped with
-the curved bats, wear knee-breeches, and the wicket
-is low and wide, with two stumps upright and one
-across. There is not a fieldsman on the off side of
-the wicket&mdash;a significant fact in itself; but further,
-and far more significant, a spectator is reclining on
-the ground, entirely at his ease, precisely in the
-position that point would occupy to-day. There can
-be but one meaning to this picture&mdash;that such a thing
-as off hitting was absolutely unknown. Possibly it
-was difficult enough to hit to the off, even with the
-best intentions, off these bats like bandy-sticks; it
-is at all events certain that it was a style of stroke
-not contemplated by the gentleman reclining on the
-ground.</p>
-
-<p>I have spoken above of the bat as an instrument
-of defence. So to style it when writing of this era
-is to commit an anachronism. The earlier cricketers,
-even of the straight-bat epoch, were guiltless of the
-very notion of defence. They were all for aggression,
-trying to score off every ball. The reason of this
-was, no doubt, in the first place that the idea of
-merely stopping the ball had not occurred to them&mdash;partly
-because the object of the game is to score, and
-because the bandy-stick style of bat must have been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span>
-singularly ill designed for defence; but also there is
-this further reason, that chance was much more on
-the batsman’s side in the old days than it is now.
-Nowadays, if a ball is straight and the batsman misses
-it, it is a simple matter of cause and effect that the
-bails are sent flying and he is out. But with the
-wicket 2 feet wide, and no middle stump, this was
-by no means so inevitable. On the contrary, it must
-have been a very frequent occurrence for the ball to
-pass through the wicket without any disturbance of
-the timber. Even when the wicket was narrowed to
-6 inches, there was still room for the ball to pass
-between the stumps, of which the fortune of the
-before-mentioned Small was a celebrated and flagrant
-instance. The old-time batsman was therefore not
-so essentially concerned with seeing that no straight
-ball got past his bat. He did not bother himself
-about defence. He gallantly tried to score off every
-ball that came to him.</p>
-
-<p>Yet, for all that, his slogging was not like the
-slogging of to-day. He had no idea of jumping in
-and taking the ball at the half-volley. His notions
-went no further than staying in his ground and
-making the best he could of the ball in such fashion
-as it was pleased to come to him.</p>
-
-<p>“These men”&mdash;the “old players,” so called in
-1780&mdash;says Mr. Pycroft, quoting the authority of
-Beldham, backed by that of Fennex, “played puddling
-about their crease, and had no freedom. I like to
-see a player upright and well forward, to face the
-ball like a man”&mdash;at this time of day, the wicket<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span>
-had lately been raised from 1 foot to 2 feet high,
-but had for some while been only 6 inches wide,
-a small mark for the bowler.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Pycroft goes on, quoting Beldham again:
-“There was some good hitting in those days”&mdash;towards
-the close of the eighteenth century is the date
-alluded to, as far as I can make out&mdash;“though too
-little defence. Tom Taylor would cut away in fine
-style, almost after the manner of Mr. Budd. Old
-Small was among the first members of the Hambledon
-Club. He began to play about 1750, and Lumpy
-Stevens at the same time. I can give you some
-notion, sir, of what cricket was in those days, for
-Lumpy, a very bad bat, as he was well aware, once
-said to me, ‘Beldham, what do you think cricket
-must have been in those days when I was thought a
-good batsman?’”</p>
-
-<p>This is instructive comment, as to the style of
-batting previous to 1780&mdash;that is the date that it
-appears we must fix for the change of style that
-brought batting in touch with modern theories. But
-by the way we ought to notice that Beldham spoke
-of the fielding as being very good, even in the oldest
-days of his recollection, and Mr. Pycroft is careful
-to add a note saying that this praise from Beldham
-was high praise indeed, and eminently to be trusted,
-as Beldham’s own hands were also eminently to be
-trusted, whether for fielding the ball on the ground
-or for a catch.</p>
-
-<p>But with the year 1780 we come to a new era in
-the art of batting, associated more particularly with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span>
-the name and art of a famous bowler, David Harris,
-the association being again an illustration of the truth,
-which has several times already been in evidence, that
-it is the bowling that is the efficient cause in educating
-the batsman&mdash;that it is the bowling that “makes the
-batting.”</p>
-
-<p>“Nowadays,” said Beldham to Mr. Pycroft, “all
-the world knows that”&mdash;namely, that the upright
-bat and the left elbow up and forward is the right
-principle of batting&mdash;“but when I began there was
-very little length bowling, little straight play, and
-very little defence either.”</p>
-
-<p>Beldham was a boy in 1780, and even before this,
-Harry Hall, the gingerbread-baker of Farnham, of
-immortal memory, was going about the country
-preaching the great truths about batting. May be
-he was but little listened to. At all events it is
-certain that until men had the straight bat to play
-with and the length bowling to contend with there
-can have been little opportunity or demand for
-straight batting.</p>
-
-<p>“The first lobbing slow bowler I ever saw was
-Tom Walker,” Beldham says. “When, in 1792,
-England played Kent, I did feel so ashamed of such
-baby bowling, but after all he did more than even
-David Harris himself. Two years after, in 1794, at
-Dartford Brent, Tom Walker, with his slow bowling,
-headed a side against David Harris, and beat him
-easily.”</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-079.jpg" width="400" height="491" id="i40"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
- <p class="pcap"><i>AN EARLY TICKET.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-080.jpg" width="400" height="325" id="i41"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc07" summary="c07">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Wm. Fecit.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>WILLIAM AND THOMAS EARLE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>And this Walker, by the way, was a wonderful
-fellow in more departments of the game than one.
-A terrible stick, but very hard to get out&mdash;very slow
-between wickets, so that one of the old jokers said to
-him, “Surely you are well named Walker, for you
-are not much of a runner”&mdash;a moderate jest, but
-showing the sort of man he was. Then he was
-“bloodless,” they said. However he was hit about
-the shins or fingers, he never showed a mark. Only
-David Harris, that terrible bowler, made the ball
-jump up and grind Tom Walker’s fingers against
-the handle of the bat; but all Tom Walker did then
-was to rub his finger in the dust to stanch the
-reluctant flow of blood. It is all very grim and
-Homeric. David Harris, rather maliciously, said he
-liked to “rind Tom,” as if he were a tree stem
-withered and gnarled. And it is a marvellous fact
-that a man of this character, whom you would call
-conservative to the core of his hard-grained timber,
-should actually have invented something new. But
-he did. He first tried the “throwing-bowling,” the
-round-arm, which was credited to Willes&mdash;probably
-an independent invention, and so meriting equal
-honour&mdash;many years after. Well may Nyren speak
-of the Walkers, Tom and Harry, as those “anointed
-clod-stumpers.” Harry was a hitter, his “half-hour
-was as good as Tom’s afternoon.”</p>
-
-<p>And meanwhile what has become of David Harris?
-David Harris, it is said, once bowled him 170 balls
-for one run. And what manner of balls were these?
-Let us consider a moment a description of David
-Harris’s bowling culled from Nyren. Parts of it
-lend themselves to the gaiety of nations, and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span>
-whole description, if not very lucid, is full of terror.
-“It would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to convey
-in writing an accurate idea of the grand effect of
-Harris’s bowling”&mdash;the effect, as a matter of fact, is
-conveyed a deal more clearly than the way in which
-it was produced. “They only who have played
-against him can fully appreciate it. His attitude, when
-preparing for his run previously to delivering the
-ball, would have made a beautiful model for the
-sculptor. Phidias would certainly have taken him as
-a model. First of all, he stood erect as a soldier at
-drill; then, with a graceful curve of the arm, he
-raised the ball to his forehead”&mdash;singular and impressive
-ritual&mdash;“and drawing back his right foot,
-started off with his left. The calm look and general
-air of the man were uncommonly striking, and from
-this series of preparations he never deviated. His
-mode of delivering the ball was very singular. He
-would bring it from under the arm by a twist, and
-nearly as high as his arm-pit, and with this action
-<i>push</i> it, as it were, from him. How it was that the
-ball acquired the velocity it did by this mode of
-delivery, I never could comprehend.”</p>
-
-<p>Nor any one else either, for Harris was a very
-fast bowler. But I am inclined to think that there
-must have been some explanation to be discovered
-out of the fact that he was by profession&mdash;before
-cricket became his profession&mdash;a potter. With the
-strength of fingers that the potter acquires through
-working at his clay, he may have had the power of
-putting an amount of spin on the ball impossible for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span>
-men whose digits had not gone through this course
-of training. In underhand bowling such as, after all
-is said, Harris’s must have been, the spin is almost
-entirely the work of fingers. The turn of wrist had
-little share in it; for one thing, it was forbidden to
-deliver the ball with the knuckles uppermost.</p>
-
-<p>And so it may well have been that, whatever the
-pace with which the ball was propelled, by these
-singular and statuesque means, through the air, it
-may have carried so much spin as to leap up twice
-as fast off the ground, as a billiard ball with much
-side on will seem to gain twice as much life after
-touching a cushion. And all that we read of Harris’s
-bowling shows that the balls did come off the ground
-with tremendous speed.</p>
-
-<p>“His balls,” says Nyren, in another place, “were
-very little beholden to the ground when pitched; it
-was but a touch, and up again, and woe be to the
-man who did not get in to block them, for they had
-such a peculiar curl that they would grind his fingers
-against the bat. Many a time have I seen the blood
-drawn in this way from a batter who was not up to
-the trick. Old Tom Walker was the only exception.
-I have before classed him among the bloodless
-animals.”</p>
-
-<p>We have seen, however, that even from him
-Harris occasionally drew blood.</p>
-
-<p>In Harris’s day it was the custom for the bowler
-to choose the wicket, and it was always his preference
-to have a bump to pitch on, and so help this rising
-tendency of the ball off the pitch. Of course this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span>
-would be the recognised aim of a bowler of to-day,
-but it was not so recognised then, and indeed
-Stevens, nicknamed “Lumpy,” generally regarded
-as the second-best bowler to Harris of his day, always
-liked to bowl “o’er a brow” in order to make his
-balls shoot. The result was, as Nyren points out,
-that Lumpy&mdash;Lumpy of the honestly avowed preference
-for bowling “o’er a brow”&mdash;would hit
-the wicket oftener, but that more catches were
-given off Harris, though his balls often went
-over the wicket. But there was no manner of
-doubt as to which was the finer bowler. Harris
-was the man.</p>
-
-<p>And now as to its effect on the batting. Notice
-these words of Beldham, for really they contain the
-kernel of the whole matter: “Woe be to the man
-who did not get in to block them, for they had such
-a peculiar curl that they would grind his fingers
-against the bat.”</p>
-
-<p>And again he says the same in more distinct
-words: “To Harris’s fine bowling I attribute the
-great improvement that was made in hitting, and
-above all in stopping, for it was utterly impossible
-to remain at the crease, when the ball was tossed
-to a fine length; you were obliged to get in, or
-it would be about your hands, or the handle of
-your bat, and every player knows where its next
-place would be.”</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-085.jpg" width="400" height="532" id="i44"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>MR. JAMES HENRY DARK.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>The Proprietor of Lord’s Cricket Ground, 1836-1864</i>).</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-086.jpg" width="400" height="533" id="i45"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>T. HUNT, OF DERBYSHIRE, d. 1858.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In this connection Mr. Pycroft writes as follows:
-“‘Fennex,’ said he”&mdash;“he” being Beldham again&mdash;“‘Fennex
-was the first who played out at balls;
-before his day, batting was too much about the
-crease.’ Beldham said that his own supposed tempting
-of Providence consisted in running in to hit.
-‘You do frighten me there jumping out of your
-ground,’ said our Squire Paulet; and Fennex used
-also to relate how, when he played forward to the
-pitch of the ball, his father ‘had never seen the like
-in all his days,’ the said days extending a long way
-back towards the beginning of the century. While
-speaking of going in to hit, Beldham said: ‘My
-opinion has always been that too little is attempted
-in that direction. Judge your ball, and when the
-least overpitched, go in and hit her away.’ In this
-opinion Mr. C. Taylor’s practice would have borne
-Beldham out, and a fine dashing game this makes;
-only, it is a game for none but practised players.
-When you are perfect in playing in your ground,
-then, and then only, try how you can play out of it,
-as the best means to scatter the enemy and open the
-field.”</p>
-
-<p>So says Mr. Pycroft, a very high authority, and
-one whose instructions to the batsman are very sound
-and worthy of the very highest respect. No doubt
-he is right in his cautious counsel&mdash;human nature is
-prone to err on the side of rashness&mdash;but he does not
-notice the indisputable fact that it is easier to meet
-the ball at the pitch, if you can reach it, than later&mdash;always
-supposing it is not a rank long hop. He is
-rather inclined to treat this principle of getting out
-to the pitch as a counsel of perfection, and perhaps it
-is more easily put in practice now that wickets are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span>
-more perfect than in his day, though if you really go
-out far enough&mdash;and unless you can get so far as to
-command the ball, however it break, it is surely better
-not to go out at all&mdash;the most troublesome ball has
-not time to develop much of its dangerous eccentricity
-before you have met it. Of course there is
-always the chance of missing it, and then there’s the
-wicket-keeper’s opportunity.</p>
-
-<p>But, all details of prudence apart, there is no
-doubt that we have here a totally new departure in
-batting, devised, as is usual, to meet some new
-requirements on the part of the bowler. A very
-kindly, genial, remarkably honest man&mdash;a really loveable
-man&mdash;was this potter, David Harris, though he
-did say, in chaff, that he liked to “rind” Tom
-Walker, and certainly he was an epoch-making
-bowler, for he made the ball come off the ground
-with an underhand action in the very way that is the
-study of our overhanders. He was a good sportsman
-too, and when he had the pitching of the wicket,
-tried to give Lumpy, at the other end, a brow to
-bowl over, while he chose for himself a brow to pitch
-against. No one ever seems to have hinted that
-Harris’s action was a jerk, though there were jerkers
-in the world in those days.</p>
-
-<p>Beldham and Fennex, then, were the first to pick
-up the new style of going in to meet the pitch of the
-ball, and so prevent its jumping up “and grinding
-their fingers on the bat.” Hitherto there had been
-good hitting, but all inside the crease, cutting and
-drawing to leg. Small had his bat straightened for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span>
-the special purpose of making the draw stroke better.
-But hitherto there had been no idea of driving a
-shorter ball than a half-volley. Now first was
-developed the idea of going in to drive the ball and
-of forward defensive play; and therewith, as I conceive,
-the batsman’s art became, in its principles,
-pretty much as Mr. Warner found it when his school
-coach began his education.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-090.jpg" width="400" height="308"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER III</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">BATTING</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">P. F. Warner</span></p>
-
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">It</span> has been said that good batsmen are born and not
-made, but my experience is rather to the contrary.
-There are certain gifts of eye and hand which all
-really good batsmen must possess, but I am strongly
-convinced that early practice and good coaching have
-a very great deal to do in the acquiring of all-round
-skill. A. E. Stoddart, whose retirement from first-class
-cricket has proved such a loss, not only to
-Middlesex, but to English cricket, is the only batsman
-who has attained to the first rank who did not
-start to play the game quite early in life, and he is
-the exception that proves the rule.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Any success I may have had as a batsman I
-attribute to my devotion to the game from my
-youngest days. Early rising in the West Indies is
-the custom, but so enthusiastic about cricket was I
-that I often got up at half-past five, so as to practise
-to the bowling of a black boy on a marble-paved
-gallery which provided the fastest and truest wicket
-I have ever played on. Even now I am ashamed
-to recall the number of broken window-panes I was
-responsible for, and many was the time that my black
-hero and I have taken to our heels, to be speedily
-followed by an irate nurse, who never failed to report
-the damage I had done to headquarters. But
-despite many a scolding, and prophecies that I should
-come to a bad end, I persevered in my wrong-doing,
-and to that perfect marble wicket and a good coach
-I owe the fact that I was seldom guilty of running
-away to square leg, a fault so common among boys.
-Therefore the first essential is a thoroughly good
-wicket to practise on, and a good wicket is not a
-difficult thing to obtain nowadays, what with the
-improved condition of grounds all over the country.
-And let me urge on every young cricketer the
-absolute necessity of practising in earnest from the
-very beginning. Endeavour to play at a net exactly
-as you would in a match, and if you are bowled out,
-try to feel almost as disappointed as if a similar fate
-had befallen you in a game. Pay attention to details,
-and if you make a bad stroke, notice where your
-mistake lay, remember it, and take the lesson to
-heart. But practise, practise, practise, and, if you<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span>
-are a keen cricketer, batting at the net may be made
-almost as enjoyable as batting in a match. Well,
-then, practise in earnest from the start of your career,
-and if possible get some keen and intelligent cricketer&mdash;not
-necessarily a great one&mdash;to coach you, but one
-with infinite patience and tact, who will occasionally
-give a word of encouragement, for an encouraging
-word and look do a greater amount of good than
-is generally imagined.</p>
-
-<p>Having got a good wicket and a capable coach,
-see that a suitable bat is in your hand, and I strongly
-advise every boy to play with a bat suited to his
-strength and style; and here I may mention that it is
-a thousand times better to play with too light a bat
-than too heavy a one, for with too heavy a bat one
-cannot cut or time the ball correctly; besides, it is
-hardly possible to play straight with it, and a straight
-bat is the very essential of good sound batting.
-Giving the young cricketer a good driving and well-balanced
-bat, see that he puts on two pads, and at any
-rate one, if not two batting gloves. Thus equipped,
-he will be ready to take his place at the wicket, and
-the first thing our imaginary coach will have to teach
-him will be his <span class="smcap">POSITION AT THE WICKET</span>. No fixed
-rules can be laid down as to the position a batsman
-should take up at the wicket, but undoubtedly the
-best advice that can be given is to take up the
-position most natural to him. The most popular
-way of standing is to place the right foot just inside
-the popping-crease, with the left just outside it, pointing
-towards the bowler or mid-off; but no two players<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span>
-stand exactly alike, and as I have said before, the
-most natural position is the best.</p>
-
-<p>There used to be a difference of opinion as to
-whether a batsman should stand with his weight
-equally balanced on both legs, or on the right leg
-only, but nowadays the universally accepted theory
-is that the weight should be chiefly on the right leg.
-At any rate, W. G. Grace, K. S. Ranjitsinhji, C. B. Fry,
-and A. C. Maclaren are all of that opinion, and
-they certainly ought to know. L. C. H. Palairet’s
-method of standing at the wicket is generally supposed
-to be the model attitude, and another cricketer whose
-position might well be studied is R. E. Foster, who,
-like Palairet, stands straight, but with a slight easing
-of the knees, which helps him to get a quick start
-at the ball. Both these cricketers stand as near as
-possible to their bats, without being leg before wicket,
-and I am a strong believer in this, for the reason that
-the nearer one is to the bat the more chance is there
-of playing absolutely straight and getting well over
-the ball. I am quite aware that there are one or two
-first-class batsmen who do not play with a straight
-bat, but they are men of wonderful eyesight, and
-their success has not altered my conviction that a boy
-should be taught to play with a straight bat.</p>
-
-<p>As for taking guard, it does not matter whether
-you take middle, middle and leg, or leg stump. I
-have taken all three in a season. It is a mere question
-of inclination.</p>
-
-<p>The bat should be held, I venture to think, in the
-manner most natural to the batsman, but the most<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span>
-common method is with the left hand nearly at the
-top of the handle, and the right hand somewhere
-about the middle; but there is no golden rule
-on the subject, and G. L. Jessop, for instance, holds
-the bat with his right hand at the very bottom
-of the handle. But Jessop is a genius, and his
-method should certainly not be copied by the young
-cricketer, unless the style of play Jessop adopts comes
-quite natural to him; then by all means he should be
-allowed to cultivate it. I rather believe myself in
-holding the bat as high up the handle with the right
-hand as possible&mdash;that is to say, about an inch or
-an inch and a half interval between the two hands.
-This is the manner in which L. C. H. Palairet holds
-his bat, and I have always regarded and always shall
-regard him as the model for young cricketers to
-copy.</p>
-
-<p>The first principle the coach has to instil into our
-young batsman is that he <i>must never move his right
-leg backwards</i> in the direction of short leg. He may
-move it to jump out to drive or to cut or to
-play back, but <i>never should he move it away from
-the wicket</i>.</p>
-
-<p>This is the first point to be mastered by the
-beginner, for if the right leg is withdrawn away from
-the wicket, it is impossible to play with a straight
-bat, which, as I have said before, is the very essence
-of good batting. If a young batsman cannot refrain
-from running away, he should have his right leg
-pegged down.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-095.jpg" width="400" height="559" id="i52"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc08" summary="c08">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>BLOCK OR PLAY.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-096.jpg" width="400" height="568" id="i53"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc09" summary="c09">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>FORWARD PLAY.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The second principle to be inculcated is that <i>a</i>
-<i>straight bat is essential to success in batting</i>, though I
-do not mean to say that the bat should be held
-straight for every stroke, for the cut and the pull, for
-instance, are not made with a straight bat; but what
-I mean is that for defensive strokes, and in some
-scoring strokes, the bat must be held straight. A
-batsman who plays with an absolutely straight bat is
-nearly always a strong defensive player.</p>
-
-<p>The third maxim is, <i>watch the ball</i>. Watch the
-bowler’s arm as he runs up to bowl, and then the ball
-as it leaves his hand. Watch it closely right on to
-your bat, and do not start with a preconceived idea
-of where the ball is going to pitch, and do not make
-up your mind to make a certain stroke before the
-ball is actually delivered.</p>
-
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Playing the Ball</span></h3>
-
-<p>All strokes may be conveniently divided into two
-kinds, back and forward, and back play and forward
-play may be further divided into back and forward
-play for defensive purposes and back and forward play
-with the object of making runs. I will deal first with
-<i>Forward play</i>, and I will imagine that a good length
-ball has been delivered on a hard, true wicket. To
-play this ball correctly the batsman should get his
-left leg well out in the line of the ball, and then bring
-his bat as close as possible to his leg. This is the
-secret of all forward play, and the young cricketer
-cannot be too often urged to “get the left leg well
-out to the bat” when playing forward. Care should<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span>
-be taken not to overbalance oneself, but if body,
-wrist, and legs work correctly, the ball may be forced
-past the fielder, and it is really quite extraordinary
-the power that may be got into the stroke. The
-position of the hands changes during the forward
-stroke, the left wrist being on the side of the bat
-away from the wicket before the stroke is played,
-and on the opposite side at the expiration of the
-stroke. The ball must of course be kept down, and
-in order to do this the left shoulder must be kept
-well forward, pointing in the direction in which the
-stroke is made, and the bat must be at such an angle
-that the top of the handle is nearer to the bowler
-than the bottom of the blade. The whole weight of
-the body should be brought to bear on the stroke,
-and the batsman must make the most of his reach,
-and the whole thing should be one action and in one
-motion. Tom Emmett, the famous old Yorkshire
-cricketer, who was our coach at Rugby during the
-five years I was there, was never tired of teaching us
-this stroke. In playing forward the bat must be
-quite straight, and at the moment of actual contact
-with the ball the bat should be just behind the left
-leg. Now that the wickets are so good, forward
-play is a very effective weapon both of offence and
-defence to have in one’s armoury, and it is therefore
-distinctly worth while for a batsman to acquire the
-highest efficiency in it.</p>
-
-<p>The off drive may range anywhere from the left
-of the bowler to just in front of point, and the ball
-to be thus driven is one that is fairly well pitched up<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span>
-on the off side of the wicket, but not necessarily a
-half-volley. The great thing is to get well to the
-pitch of the ball, watch it, and not slash wildly at it.
-Care must be taken not to have a “go” at too wide
-a ball, for this is a favourite trick of slow bowlers,
-especially left-handers, and often results in an easy
-catch on the off side. There is one stroke, which is
-neither a genuine cut nor a genuine off drive, which
-may for convenience sake be dealt with here. The
-left leg is thrown out, as if the batsman were about
-to play a genuine off drive, but the ball is hit later
-than in the off drive, and with a horizontal rather
-than a perpendicular bat, the shoulders and forearm
-being brought into play rather more than the wrist.
-In some respects the stroke is very like the forward
-cut, of which I shall speak later, and many cricketers
-do not consider it an off drive, but rather in the
-nature of a cut. It is a useful stroke for a weak-wristed
-player. A good length ball on the off stump
-should be played in the direction of mid-off. A
-ball just wide of the off stump in the direction of
-extra cover, and a ball about a foot wide on the off
-side, should be played towards cover-point. The
-farther the ball is pitched outside the off stump, the
-farther ought the left leg to be thrown across the
-wicket, and the farther ought the left shoulder to be
-thrown forward. The wider the ball is, the more
-difficult it is to play, and a mistake common amongst
-beginners is that, without considering the direction of
-the ball, they advance the left leg straight down the
-wicket, just as if, in fact, the ball had pitched on the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span>
-off stump, and not, for instance, a foot outside it.
-The left leg should be thrown <i>across the wicket almost
-in a line with the flight of the ball</i>. If the batsman
-plays forward at a ball a foot outside the off stump
-with his left leg straight down the wicket, he will
-find that the weight of his body will play no part in
-the stroke, and that should the ball break back he
-will be bowled out; therefore always remember to
-get the left leg well out to the bat, for apart from
-this being the golden rule for all forward play, there
-is an added advantage to be gained from the fact
-that, if the ball breaks enough to beat the bat, there
-will be little or no room for it to pass between the
-bat and the leg.</p>
-
-<p>But in forward strokes, as in all other strokes, the
-great thing is to watch the ball carefully, for should
-you be playing forward with “your head in the air,”
-that is to say, not looking at the ball, which at the
-last minute does something unexpected, either bumping
-or hanging on the pitch, you will for a certainty
-find yourself in trouble; and therefore, until you are
-thoroughly well set and have got the exact pace of the
-wicket, there should be a margin for emergencies,
-so that it should be possible to alter one’s stroke at
-the last moment. The best way of playing a ball
-which one has gone forward to, and which one finds
-one cannot reach far enough to smother at the pitch,
-is to adopt the “half-cock” stroke. This stroke is
-made by holding the bat quite straight just over or
-slightly in front of the popping-crease and letting
-the ball hit it. It is a most excellent defensive stroke,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span>
-and the proper way to play a ball whose length one
-has misjudged. W. G. Grace uses this stroke very
-frequently, as does F. S. Jackson. In making a
-forcing forward stroke the great thing is to swing
-the arms well and carry the stroke right through,
-which if well timed will send the ball very quickly
-to the boundary. Some batsmen play this forcing
-forward stroke so hard that it is difficult to distinguish
-it from a genuine hit, and I have a very vivid recollection
-of a grand innings of a hundred odd which
-A. E. Stoddart played at Lord’s for Middlesex
-against Kent some five or six years ago. The wicket
-was hard and fast, and the power with which Mr.
-Stoddart forced good length balls from W. M.
-Bradley to the off boundary was astonishing. In
-offensive forward play great care should be taken
-not to bend the right knee, for with the bending of
-the right knee comes the sinking of the right shoulder,
-and if the shoulder sinks the batsman is very likely
-to get under the ball. When a batsman who is a
-strong forward player is thoroughly well set on a
-hard, true wicket, many of his runs will come from
-off drives, especially if the bowling be fast or medium
-paced, and the power one can get into an off drive,
-if body, wrist, and eye are working together, is almost
-as great as in the case of a genuine hit. It requires
-no great physique to be a powerful off driver, for a
-man of very slight build, if he is timing the ball well&mdash;and
-by timing the ball I mean the harmonious
-working of body, wrist, and eye&mdash;can make the ball
-travel to the boundary as fast as a strongly and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span>
-powerfully built man. There are few better moments
-at cricket than when one has forced a good length
-ball through the fielders on the off side, standing
-well balanced where one is, and the ball making haste
-to the ring. There is a very conscious feeling that
-brain, eye, body, and hand have all acted in concert,
-and that a great deal has been accomplished with a
-minimum of exertion.</p>
-
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Back Play</span></h3>
-
-<p>As soon as a batsman has made up his mind to
-play a ball back, the weight of his body should be
-transferred to the left leg, and the right foot should
-be moved back towards the wicket and the left leg
-drawn up to it.</p>
-
-<p>Many writers on cricket have laid it down as a
-rule that the right leg should never be moved in
-playing back, which may be all very well as an
-elementary principle for a boy who is just starting
-cricket, but which, I submit, with all respect, is
-altogether wrong if applied to one who has got over
-the initial difficulties of the game. For myself,
-were I coaching a boy, I should tell him to move
-the right leg in playing back, though of course I
-would never allow him to move it away from the
-wicket. With a moment’s thought it will be seen
-that a batsman who moves his right leg towards the
-wicket must have a better chance of playing the ball
-correctly than one who stands with his right leg
-glued to the ground. In the first place, by moving<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span>
-back he makes the ball which he is shaping at shorter
-than it would have been if he had stood where he
-was by the distance that he stepped back. The ball
-is made shorter by two feet if the batsman moves
-two feet towards his wicket, instead of playing it
-where he originally stood, and the two feet more
-which in this case the ball has to travel gives the
-batsman so much the more time to judge and play
-it. Again, supposing a ball pitches on the off stump
-or just outside it, the batsman will assuredly play
-that particular ball more correctly if he moves his
-right leg across the wicket in a line with the off
-stump than if he keeps it firmly planted just off the
-leg stump. It stands to reason that if he moves his
-right leg across the wicket in a line with the ball, he
-will be nearer the direction the ball may take after
-pitching than if he adhered to his original position.
-Moreover, should the particular type of ball we are
-discussing break an inch or two from leg, the odds
-on his being caught at slip or the wicket are very
-great, should he not move his right leg across the
-wicket; whereas, should he bring his right leg across
-to the off stump and watch the ball closely after
-it has pitched, he will stand a far better chance of
-playing that ball in the middle of his bat than if he
-had remained with his right leg rooted to the earth.
-I well remember a very promising boy at Rugby,
-one who is now a county player, being nearly ruined
-by one of the cricketing masters insisting on his
-never moving his right leg, with the result that time
-after time was he caught at slip or the wicket, for the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span>
-simple reason that he was too far off the ball when
-he played at it.</p>
-
-<p>In playing forward, the golden rule is to get the
-left leg well forward to the direction the ball is
-taking, and the bat well up to the leg. The same
-rule applies in playing back. Get the right leg up
-to the line of the ball, and the bat as near as possible
-to the leg. The difficulty about moving back across
-the wicket is that the stroke requires considerable
-quickness of eye and foot, and quickness of foot is
-a point not half enough insisted on by the majority
-of coaches. All the best back players play back
-in this classical way&mdash;Victor Trumper, Ranjitsinhji,
-C. B. Fry, Tyldesley, A. C. Maclaren, and F. S.
-Jackson. If the ball in question breaks back into
-the batsman, he is equally well prepared for it, for he
-is well over the ball and better able to contend with
-the break, because more easily able to move his bat
-and get into position to play the stroke, than if he
-were standing firmly fixed on his right leg. Any
-one who thinks about the matter at all must see the
-advantage of playing in this way. It seems to me
-that in cricket the nearer the striker’s body is to the
-ball, the more likely he is to make a correct stroke,
-for the reason that his eye is nearer to the object he
-is striking at. If then a batsman keeps his right
-foot firmly fixed just off the leg stump to a ball
-which pitches on the off stump or a couple of inches
-outside it, his eye is necessarily farther away from
-that ball than if he moved his right leg across the
-wicket in the direction the ball is taking. I do not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span>
-think this point can be insisted on too strongly by
-coaches. Besides, let any cricketer compare the two
-methods of playing back, and he will, I am convinced,
-find the one I have urged the easiest and most
-natural.</p>
-
-<p>I am a firm believer in this method of playing
-back, not only because all the famous players use it&mdash;and
-that in itself were sufficient&mdash;but because from
-one’s own experience it has proved not only the
-easiest, but by far the most effective. By drawing
-back the right foot towards the wicket, not away
-from it, a batsman is often able to force the ball
-away between mid-on and the bowler, or between mid-off
-and the bowler, or between short leg and mid-on,
-the ball in the last instance being played away by
-a quick turn of the wrist at the last moment.</p>
-
-<p>“It is a mistake to play back behind the legs, for
-it is impossible to put any power into a stroke when
-the bat is held nearer the wicket than the batsman
-himself is standing.” These are the words of K. S.
-Ranjitsinhji in the <i>Jubilee Book of Cricket</i>, and as
-Ranjitsinhji is about the best back player in the world,
-he ought to know.</p>
-
-<p>It is comparatively easy to play back as a defensive
-stroke, but any one who aspires to be a really good
-batsman must learn to make his back play a means
-of scoring runs. On a difficult wicket back play is
-everything; in fact, it may be safely said that a
-good rule to bear in mind on a sticky wicket is <i>to
-play back or hit</i>.</p>
-
-<p>A batsman, unless he be an experienced one, ought<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span>
-not to try and hook short balls round to leg, especially
-if the bowling is fast, but a “rank long-hopper” may
-be hit to any point of the compass with a horizontal
-bat; though, however short and bad a ball, it should
-be carefully watched all the way, in case of an unexpected
-hang or rise. Short and straight balls, if
-they do not get up to any height, may be flicked
-round on the on side by a quick turn of the
-wrist.</p>
-
-<p>In making the hook stroke the batsman should
-move back towards the wicket, turn almost square to
-the ball, and hit with a horizontal bat to the on side.
-The ball should be watched right on to the bat, so
-that, if it does anything unexpected, an ordinary back
-stroke may be substituted. Even a very short ball
-outside the off stump may be hooked round to leg,
-especially if there are seven fielders on the off side
-and only two or three on the on side. Shrewsbury,
-Tyldesley, A. C. Maclaren, C. B. Fry, K. S. Ranjitsinhji,
-and Victor Trumper are, or were, very good
-at this stroke, which may be made, by using the wrists,
-with an almost straight bat. Men who play the
-stroke with their arms, like A. C. Maclaren, hit across
-the ball. To hook a fast bowler is a proceeding
-fraught with no little danger, and ought only to be
-indulged in very occasionally, for it is a stroke that
-requires no little skill and nerve, for often the ball
-comes shoulder or head high to the batsman. A. E.
-Stoddart was particularly good at hitting this type of
-ball round to leg. Indeed, all round there have been
-few finer players to fast bowling than Stoddart. On<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span>
-slow wickets the hook stroke is simply invaluable,
-and short straight balls may be despatched to the
-boundary quite easily.</p>
-
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">The Back Glance</span></h3>
-
-<p>A ball rather short of a good length pitching just
-outside the leg stump should be played away on the
-leg side with a backward movement. The right foot
-is put well back in a line with the leg stump, and the
-left foot drawn up beside it, but different cricketers
-play the stroke differently. Ranjitsinhji, for instance,
-moves his left leg across the wicket towards point,
-faces the ball, and plays it at the last instant by a
-quick turn of the wrist. Other batsmen turn almost
-right round, and others get right in front of the
-wicket. The ball must be watched right on to the
-bat, and the ball should glance away somewhere
-behind the umpire, or in the direction of long leg.
-It is a most useful and fascinating stroke, and can
-be employed to balls pitching on the middle and leg
-stumps, especially to a break-back bowler, though of
-course there is a danger here of being given l.b.w.</p>
-
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">The Forward Glance</span></h3>
-
-<p>A good length or slightly overpitched ball just
-outside the leg stump should be played in the following
-manner: The left leg should be thrown down the
-wicket in a line with the ball, and the moment the
-ball touches the bat, the bat should be pushed forward<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span>
-by a quick turn of the wrist, the whole weight of the
-body being put into the stroke. The body is thrown
-well forward, with the result that the ball will go round
-to leg at a great pace.</p>
-
-<p>I have found this a very useful stroke to bowlers
-like Mold, Richardson, and Lockwood, who break
-back into one, and, as in the case of the back glance,
-the stroke may be made to a ball pitching on the
-middle and leg stump to a break-back bowler. At
-Lord’s it is a particularly effective stroke if one is
-batting at the end opposite the Pavilion, for the slope
-in the ground tends to accentuate the off break of any
-bowler who is on at the Pavilion end. Altogether it
-is a very productive stroke in first-class cricket. The
-back glance and the forward glance have practically
-taken the place of the leg hit, though, with the new-fashioned
-type of leg-break bowling as practised by
-Vine, Braund, Armstrong the Australian, and others,
-the genuine leg hit was more often seen last season
-than in some past years; but with six or seven men
-on the on side, it is extremely difficult to hit a
-leg ball without running the risk of being caught
-somewhere on the leg side, especially as the Braund
-type of bowler bowls a good length outside the
-batsman’s legs.</p>
-
-<p>The square leg hit is made by advancing the left
-leg down the wicket, and hitting the ball just as it
-passes the left leg. It is either just before the ball
-pitches or on the rise, according to the length of the
-ball. It is a very difficult matter to keep the ball
-down, the complete success of the stroke depending
-upon perfect accuracy of timing. This hit ought
-only to be attempted to a ball short of a half-volley.
-If the ball is a half-volley or well up, the correct
-stroke is in front of the wicket or square to leg with
-a vertical bat.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-110.jpg" width="400" height="573" id="i65"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc10" summary="c10">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE DRAW OR PULL.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>I am inclined to think that the glance stroke is
-preferable to the square leg or long leg hit, for it is
-quite as good for scoring purposes, and the ball can
-be watched right on to the bat, and placed and kept
-down with far greater certainty.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">The Pull</span></h3>
-
-<p>differs from the hook stroke in that it is more in
-the nature of a drive. The pull stroke is used to
-hit a ball pitched outside the off stump round to leg,
-and the stroke may be applied either to a half-volley
-or a good length ball outside the off stump.</p>
-
-<p>W. W. Read used to be the great exponent of this
-stroke, and Ranjitsinhji also plays it with wonderful
-certainty. It is a dangerous stroke, for the ball
-which can thus be treated requires very careful
-choosing, and it is the difficulty of choosing the right
-ball which makes the stroke dangerous. The left
-foot should be thrown out to the pitch of the ball,
-and just as the ball rises from the ground it should
-be hit round on the on side with a horizontal bat. It
-is often a very useful stroke on a sticky wicket, to a
-bowler who is breaking back, though there is some
-risk of being caught at deep square leg, rather in
-front of the wicket, by the fielder who is almost<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span>
-invariably placed there when the wicket is helping the
-bowler.</p>
-
-<p>A straight half-volley is a ball which every player
-ought to be able to drive, and it should always be hit
-in the most natural direction. It is a mistake to try
-and pull a straight half-volley. The chief point to
-remember in hitting a half-volley is to get as much
-swing as possible into the stroke. One or two batsmen
-swing the bat so far back that they occasionally
-hit themselves with the back of the bat on the head.
-The shoulders should come greatly into play in the
-drive, for they give added power to the swing of the
-arms, and throw the weight of the body with great
-force on to the left leg at the moment of hitting the
-ball.</p>
-
-<p>In driving, the back of the left hand remains facing
-the bowler, instead of being on the opposite side of
-the handle, as in the case of forward play. The bat,
-as in forward play, must be kept as near as possible
-to the left leg. Batsmen who are quick on their feet
-often jump out to the pitch of a ball, and thereby
-make it a half-volley. Victor Trumper, the finest
-batsman Australia has ever produced, is the great
-exponent of this stroke, and the rapidity with which
-he gets to the ball is astonishing.</p>
-
-<p>It is, if successfully played, a very useful stroke,
-for nothing is more apt to put a bowler off his length
-than by thus attacking him. It is of course a stroke
-more suitable for slow bowling than for fast.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-113.jpg" width="400" height="486" id="i66"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc11" summary="c11">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE LEG VOLLEY.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-114.jpg" width="400" height="504" id="i67"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc12" summary="c12">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE CUT.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span></p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">The On Drive</span></h3>
-
-<p>Nearly every batsman prays for a half-volley on
-the leg stump, or one pitching within three or four
-inches of the leg stump, for, if properly timed, it is
-a stroke which sends a thrill of joy through the batsman.
-If the ball pitches on the wicket, the hit should
-be made between the bowler and mid-on, though
-with a break-back bowler the ball may often be
-forced wide of mid-on’s right side. If the ball
-pitches outside the leg stump, it should be hit anywhere
-to the right of mid-on.</p>
-
-<p>The whole body should work in agreement, the
-arms should swing freely, and the stroke should be
-well followed through. Nearly all the great batsmen
-play this stroke to perfection, but none better than
-F. S. Jackson.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">The Cut</span></h3>
-
-<p>There are three classes of cuts: the forward
-cut, the square cut, and the late cut.</p>
-
-<p>The forward cut is made at a shortish ball outside
-the off stump, the right foot being kept still, but the
-left foot brought across in the line of the ball. It is
-a stroke that requires very accurate timing, but when
-timed well, the ball often goes to the ring like a flash
-of lightning, somewhere between point and cover-point.
-W. L. Murdoch plays this stroke particularly
-well, as do A. O. Jones, H. K. Foster, and W. Gunn,
-while C. H. B. Marsham made the great majority of
-his fine 100 not out in the ‘Varsity match of 1901<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span>
-by its means. It is a somewhat dangerous stroke, for
-should the ball hang or bump unexpectedly, an uppish
-hit will in all probability follow.</p>
-
-<p>The square cut sends the ball just behind point,
-and is made by moving the right foot across the
-wicket in a line with the off stump; and just as the
-ball is passing the batsman’s body, the bat is brought
-down by a quick movement of the arms, while more
-power is added to the stroke by a sharp flick of the
-wrists. The bat should be slanting downwards
-towards the ground, in order to get well over the
-ball.</p>
-
-<p>Tyldesley of Lancashire plays the same cut as
-well as any one else, though he often hits across
-the ball rather than over it, a fine stroke, harder
-than if he had got over the ball, being the result.
-His method is, however, a little dangerous,
-as there is a chance of the ball going up, though
-Tyldesley seems to have brought the stroke to
-perfection.</p>
-
-<p>In the late cut the right foot is moved across to
-the same position as in the case of the square cut,
-but the ball is hit <i>after</i> it has passed the batsman’s
-body. The most suitable ball for the late cut is one
-pitched wide of the off stump, not quite so short as
-the ball for the square cut, but still short of a good
-length. It is essentially a wrist stroke, and a man
-with a weak wrist will be wise not to attempt it.
-Late cutting requires a little manœuvring-ground,
-and care must be taken to avoid cutting at a ball too
-near the wicket.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>There are few players who cut late really well, for
-the stroke requires the greatest nicety in timing and
-a strong, flexible pair of wrists. Ranjitsinhji makes
-this stroke with great certainty and brilliancy, but
-then he possesses an extraordinarily supple pair of
-wrists.</p>
-
-<p>There is another kind of cut, called the “chop,”
-which should be used to a short ball outside the off
-stump which keeps low after pitching. The bat
-should be brought down with great force horizontally,
-and if well timed the ball will go very hard. This
-is a favourite stroke of Sir T. C. O’Brien, K. G.
-Key, Victor Trumper, and R. E. Foster, who in the
-‘Varsity match of 1900 brought off this stroke on
-several occasions off E. M. Dowson’s bowling. On
-a hard, true wicket, against fast or medium-paced
-bowling, forward play is the best; against slow
-bowling and lobs play back or hit is, generally speaking,
-the soundest advice that can be given a young
-cricketer, though on some wickets slow bowling may
-be played forward to, and even forced forward. But
-every really good slow bowler varies his pace. Five
-out of the six balls may be more or less of the same
-pace; but one ball out of the over is generally a
-fast one, or at any rate medium pace. Rhodes, the
-Yorkshire left-hander, bowls a very good fast ball,
-which comes across quickly with his arm, and the
-same may be said of Blythe of Kent and Cranfield of
-Somerset; while amongst slow right-handed bowlers
-C. M. Wells, for instance, is constantly varying
-the flight and pace of the ball. But in distinguishing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span>
-the different styles of play which should be adopted
-in playing fast and slow bowling, it is well to
-remember that to fast bowling one plays forward to
-score runs, while to slow bowling you play forward
-to defend your wicket; though, as I have said before,
-a slow bowler may often be pushed forward between
-the fielders for one and two and sometimes four
-runs.</p>
-
-<p>I do not think that batsmen jump out enough to
-slow bowling, for there is nothing so demoralising to
-a bowler as a batsman who comes out of his ground
-and hits when the ball is at all overpitched.
-Remember, if you do make up your mind to jump
-out and hit, to get right to the pitch of the ball;
-forget, too, for the moment, that there is such a
-person as the wicket-keeper.</p>
-
-<p>When the bowling is fast enough to compel the
-wicket-keeper to stand back, I have found it a good
-plan to stand a foot or two outside the popping-crease.
-This tends to put the bowler off his length,
-for he finds his good length balls hit on the half-volley,
-and this, for the time at any rate, is apt to
-disconcert him.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-119.jpg" width="400" height="534" id="i70"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BATS, WHICH BELONGED TO
-THE FOURTH DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-120.jpg" width="400" height="633" id="i71"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>CELEBRATED BATS.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn"><i>The one on the left belonged to Alfred Mynn, 1850; the centre one was originally
-used by Merser, of Kent (left-handed batsman); and the right-hand bat by
-E. Bagot, 1793.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In playing lobs you may stand in your ground
-and play back, occasionally scoring a single, but in
-dealing with lobs offensive tactics are the best, for, as
-a great general once said, “The best method of
-defence is to attack.” Lobs should therefore be
-either hit on the full pitch or played back, and the
-batsman should stand a little easier on his right leg
-than if he were playing fast or medium bowling, so
-as to be ready to jump out and take the ball on the
-full pitch the moment he sees that it is slightly overpitched.
-By far the best lob bowler of the present
-day is D. L. A. Jephson, the Surrey captain, for he
-varies the flight and pace of the ball extremely
-cleverly, often, indeed, sending in quite a fast good
-length ball. He can, too, make the ball break
-both ways, and many people think that he
-might with advantage to Surrey bowl more than
-he does.</p>
-
-<p>Batting on a hard, true wicket and on a sticky,
-difficult one are two entirely different things, and one
-often sees a man who is a fine player on a fast wicket
-absolutely at sea when rain has ruined the pitch.
-A left-handed bowler like Rhodes is then in his
-element, for he pitches the ball a good length on the
-leg stump; it comes across quickly to the off, and
-you stand a very good chance of being either bowled,
-or caught by David Hunter at the wicket, or snapped
-up by eager and lengthy John Tunnicliffe at short
-slip. Haigh, also of Yorkshire, is an extremely
-difficult bowler on this kind of wicket, for the amount
-of off break he can get on the ball is prodigious;
-while Trumble, the Australian, is probably as hard
-a bowler to play under these circumstances as ever
-lived.</p>
-
-<p>As a rule the hitting or “long-handle game,” as
-it has been called, pays best under these circumstances,
-but some men who are really strong in their back and
-on side play can play their ordinary game. A strong
-defensive back player can often get a good length<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span>
-ball which breaks back away on the on side for two
-or three runs, while a good puller has a great advantage
-on this kind of wicket. The man who does
-not watch the ball, and watch it well, will have little
-or no chance on a sticky wicket. At one time there
-were very few men who could play at all successfully
-on a really difficult wicket, but of late years, what
-with the general improvement in back play&mdash;due
-chiefly to Ranjitsinhji’s influence on the game&mdash;the
-number, though far from being large, has increased.
-Victor Trumper, F. S. Jackson, Ranjitsinhji,
-C. B. Fry, A. C. Maclaren, T. L. Taylor, and
-Tyldesley are the best batsmen we have under conditions
-favourable to the bowler, and I shall never
-forget an extraordinary innings Ranjitsinhji played
-at Brighton in July 1900 for Middlesex <i>v.</i> Sussex.
-When stumps were drawn on the second evening of
-the match, Ranjitsinhji was not out 37, the game up
-to that time having been played on a perfect wicket.
-Rain, however, fell heavily in the night, and with the
-sun coming out next morning, the wicket was altogether
-in favour of the bowler. Vine made 17, but
-no one else on the side that day got more than 5,
-excepting Ranjitsinhji, who was last man out, l.b.w. to
-Trott, for 202! He gave one chance in the long
-field when he had made about 160 runs, but apart
-from this, his batting was absolutely without a flaw.
-Most of his runs came from hard drives, chiefly to
-the on, and strokes on the leg side. It was an astonishing
-innings, and its full significance was possibly not
-appreciated until Tate, on an exactly similar wicket,
-dismissed a powerful Middlesex eleven for just over
-100 runs.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-123.jpg" width="400" height="533" id="i72"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>WAR-WORN WEAPONS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-124.jpg" width="400" height="518" id="i73"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>RELICS OF PAST ENGAGEMENTS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>A few words now on running. Never attempt a
-run if you feel any doubt as to its safety, for it is
-better to lose a possible single than to run out your
-partner. At the same time, I do not think that
-cricketers as a rule run as well as they ought to
-between the wickets. The Australians are an exception;
-they are extraordinarily quick.</p>
-
-<p>Always back up two or three yards; when you call,
-call in a decided manner. If your partner calls you,
-run hard if you intend to go; if you do not, stop
-him at once. The great thing is to make up your
-mind instantly.</p>
-
-<p>If you are the striker, and you play the ball in
-front of the wicket, <i>always say</i> something&mdash;either
-“Yes,” “No,” or “Wait.” If you hit the ball
-behind the wicket, your partner at the bowler’s end
-should call, but as to whether the striker or non-striker
-should call the hit to third man many
-cricketers differ. The best plan, in my opinion, is
-to arrange with your partner. In that event a
-disaster is not likely to occur.</p>
-
-<p>Always run the first run as hard as you can, and
-always look out for a second run when the ball is hit
-to the long field, for even to a Tyldesley, a Denton,
-or a Burnup, good runners, who understand one
-another, may often with safety get two for a drive to
-the long field when a slower runner would be content
-with a single.</p>
-
-<p>There are, too, very few third men to whom one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span>
-cannot run. I do not mean to say that a run should
-be attempted to third man when the ball goes hard
-and straight to him on the first bounce, but for a
-stroke a little to one side of him there is frequently
-a run. But the two batsmen must use their own
-discretion&mdash;and as has been said, <i>it is a thousand times
-better to lose a run than to risk running out your partner</i>.
-I was twice run out in the ‘Varsity match of 1896&mdash;to
-a great extent my own fault in the second innings,&mdash;and
-since that game&mdash;memorable for the fact that
-Oxford, going in with 330 runs to win, hit off the
-number for the loss of four wickets, and for the
-no-ball incident which led eventually to an alteration
-in the follow-on rule&mdash;I have taken particular
-pains to improve my running between the wickets.
-I am not often run out now, and I hope I but
-seldom run my partner out&mdash;<i>Experientia docet
-sapientiam</i>.</p>
-
-<p>Many batsmen, when nearing their 50 or 100,
-attempt the most absurd runs. This fault is more
-common amongst professional cricketers than amongst
-amateurs, for the reason that all the counties, with
-the one exception of Yorkshire, give their professionals
-a sovereign for every 50 runs they make.
-This so-called “talent-money” has been the cause of
-many a run-out. Yorkshire gives no “talent-money,”
-but over and above the usual fee of £5 or £6 a
-match, each professional is “marked” according to
-his work in a particular game. For example, if a
-man made 25 runs on a bad wicket at a critical
-time, or even 10 not out in a one-wicket victory,
-he would be marked according to the merit of
-his performance in the eyes of his captain&mdash;in this
-case Lord Hawke. A fine bowling feat or a fine
-catch would be similarly rewarded. Each mark represents
-five shillings, and this system might with
-advantage be adopted by other counties.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-127.jpg" width="400" height="609" id="i74"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>GEORGE PARR, THE FAMOUS NOTTINGHAM BAT.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-128.jpg" width="400" height="560" id="i75"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>“N. FELIX” (N. Wanostrocht).</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>There is one thing that no coaching will teach a
-young cricketer, and that is confidence. Time alone
-can give him that, for confidence is a plant of slow
-growth. I do not believe the cricketer who says he
-has never been nervous&mdash;he is certainly not a first-class
-cricketer if he adheres to that statement; but
-nervousness will gradually disappear as a batsman
-gains confidence in himself. I have known men who
-when they first played county cricket were almost
-paralysed with nervousness, but who after two or
-three years’ experience went out to bat with every
-confidence. Nervousness is undoubtedly a great
-handicap, and young players should try to overcome
-this weakness as soon as possible. Too much
-confidence is a mistake, for, to go back again to the
-Latin grammar, <i>nimia fiducia calamitati solet esse</i>.
-But too much confidence is better than no confidence&mdash;and
-by confidence I do not mean conceit, but a
-belief in one’s own capabilities, founded on past
-deeds.</p>
-
-<p>There are cricketers, too, who are so superstitious
-as to be almost a nuisance. There is the man who
-thinks he cannot make runs unless he goes in in a
-particular place. These men are somewhat annoying,
-but I think a captain should always try to humour<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span>
-them, if by so doing he is not upsetting the batting
-order of his side.</p>
-
-<p>The typical instance of superstition affecting one’s
-play at cricket seems to me to have been exemplified
-in the case of the Rugby boy who, alighting at the
-St. John’s Wood Station on the Metropolitan Railway,
-for the Rugby and Marlborough match, saw the
-advertisement of Mr. John Hare’s play, <i>A Pair of
-Spectacles</i>, staring him in the face. That boy had
-made heaps of runs during the summer at Rugby,
-but he came on to the ground fully convinced that
-he would make a pair of spectacles, and make them
-he did.</p>
-
-<p>Again, G. O. Smith, to whose splendid batting
-Oxford were mainly indebted for their victory over
-Cambridge in 1896, had a firm conviction that he
-could only make runs in a certain pair of trousers;
-and G. J. Mordaunt, the Oxford captain of the
-previous year, took it as an evil omen, when, on
-awaking on the morning of the ‘Varsity match, he saw
-from his bedroom window the flag with “Druce” in
-large letters on it flying from the Baker Street Bazaar.
-W. E. Druce was captain of the Light Blue eleven
-that year, and Mordaunt’s feeling of coming disaster
-was, I regret to say, justified by the result of the
-match, for Cambridge beat us by 134 runs.</p>
-
-<p>Coaches should be careful to avoid cramping the
-style of a young batsman, and of suppressing individuality
-and budding genius. Batsmen cannot
-be all of one type. Had G. L. Jessop been made to
-play according to the rules laid down, a great hitter<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span>
-would have been lost to the world, and England
-would never have won that last test-match at the
-Oval, for there would have been no Jessop on the
-side to accomplish what was, perhaps, the finest piece
-of hitting ever seen on a cricket-ground. It is
-useless trying to make a Barlow into a Lyons, or
-a Lyons into a Barlow.</p>
-
-<p>Always endeavour to reach the ground in good
-time before a match begins, and to have five or ten
-minutes’ practice; though there are some batsmen who
-do not believe in too much net practice. Every man
-must of course decide what suits himself best, but I
-cannot believe that a few minutes at a net can do
-anything but good, for one gains a sight of the ball,
-and gets the pace of the wicket.</p>
-
-<p>If you are put in to bat anywhere but first, always
-remember that it is your duty not to take more than
-two minutes in getting to the wicket, for that is the
-limit allowed by law. This is most important, for
-you have no right to keep your partner waiting, and
-to waste time.</p>
-
-<p>No one will ever become a great batsman without
-enthusiasm, and enthusiasm of the kind which will
-carry him through the inevitable disappointments and
-troubles of his early career. The path to success is
-not easy, and success comes only to the few. But
-the goal once reached, he must be a poor man indeed
-who does not feel a glow of pride on seeing the magic
-figures 100 going up on the big scoring-board at
-Lord’s beneath his name; for believe me, the satisfaction
-is so great, and the applause such sweet music,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span>
-that it is worth while taking the greatest pains to
-attain the proficiency necessary to the achievement of
-the feat. There is, too, a subtle charm and fascination
-about the game which creates among its devotees a
-bond of fellowship and <i>camaraderie</i> which nothing
-can alter.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-134.jpg" width="400" height="535" id="i79"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc13" summary="c13">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE BOWLER.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>Alfred Mynn</i>).</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-135.jpg" width="400" height="159"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER IV</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">BOWLING</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">D. L. A. Jephson</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">To</span> those that have time hanging all too heavily on
-their hands, and in good truth know not what to
-do&mdash;to those perchance that may, through lack of
-occupation, be compelled amid adverse circumstances,
-finding that anything is occasionally better than nothing,
-to peruse these jagged, untrimmed sentences&mdash;I would
-say this: that for many days, with a deep determination
-of purpose, I have perused the writings of our great
-cricketers&mdash;I have read the golden words of Grace,
-of Steel, of Ranjitsinhji&mdash;and have arrived hot-haste,
-sick at heart, at the conclusion that I cannot retell
-what has so often been told by them, and told so
-clearly, so succinctly, with such prodigious insight
-into the profound ramifications of this art. And so,
-like some pale-faced curate sitting fear-bound beneath
-the terrifying presence of a ruddy bishop, I must
-perforce scratch with a rusty pen of the bowlers I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span>
-have met. In the ten years of my cricket life I have
-met many.</p>
-
-<p>Let us divide them into classes. We will take
-the old-time division; we will divide them into four&mdash;those
-that are of a slow pace, those that are of a
-medium pace, those that are fast, and those semi-moribund
-trundlers, the dealers in lobs.</p>
-
-<p>Having myself started in my early days with the
-firm conviction that this old game of cricket was the
-best game for boys and men of moderate years that
-the ingenuity of generations had invented, I became
-also convinced that to be a great bowler was the
-highest pinnacle of fame, and at the same time of
-usefulness, that a cricketer could hope to rest on.</p>
-
-<p>The work, without doubt, is hard, the labour of
-the day strenuous, but the pleasure of bowling a
-length with the wicket a bit in your favour, with a
-side that are trying to field, and not loafing as “little
-mounds of earth or waxen figures in a third-rate
-tailor’s shop,” is a goodly thing, a thing to dream of.
-And this craft of bowling is so sure, so certain. A
-great batsman may make a mistake, even on the Oval
-in the height of summer, even on the Oval in the
-height of perfection&mdash;and all those that have played
-there know the miraculous opportunities for run-getting
-this ground affords&mdash;he may make a mistake,
-let us say, bowled Richardson, 0! Well, for the day
-he is done&mdash;up to now of no use to his side, of no use
-to himself. Now, take the great bowler on a wicket
-of this excellence, or of any other. He can make a
-mistake, drop a slower one a bit too short, overpitch<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span>
-the well-intentioned yorker, falter in his stride and be
-placed to leg for four. What matter from a selfish
-point of view? His fun for the day has not departed.
-He bowls and bowls, and continues to bowl; and
-probably the blind goddess gives in the end the
-wherewithal to be cheerful. Therefore, on this
-miserable lowest ground of self-interest, be a bowler!</p>
-
-<p>And then again, when he has done a noble thing&mdash;or
-perchance it is his birthday, and the elements give
-heeding to his call&mdash;there falls, let us say, a gentle
-rain in the early-bird hours, and a hot sun scorches
-from 10 to 12. He has got his money on a two
-to one chance (and nobody else in the race)&mdash;Peel,
-Rhodes, Haigh, Jack Hearne, the wonderful
-George Lohmann, and dozens more. What does
-the other side make? They are lucky to make 100&mdash;lucky
-to make 70!</p>
-
-<p>To be a bowler on a bit of bird-lime is the biggest
-certainty the cricket world has knowledge of. You
-may meet a Ranjitsinhji, a Bonner, a Jessop, or a
-Frank Crawford; but if you don’t meet these, the
-odds on you are as the odds on an arc light to a
-farthing dip.</p>
-
-<p>Again&mdash;for a moment to raise the platform on
-which we have been discussing so casually this selfish
-side of the bowler’s existence&mdash;there can be little
-doubt that of the three branches of the game (batting,
-bowling, fielding), bowling is the pivot on which the
-other two turn. Who is the more use to his side&mdash;the
-great batsman or the great bowler? Nine out
-of ten intelligent beings answer unhesitatingly, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span>
-bowler; and rightly too, especially if he be of
-medium pace, or even slow medium, on a great
-variety of wickets, ranging from the fiery, cast-iron,
-stone-strewn rock of an Old Trafford wicket (I don’t
-mean for a second that the Old Trafford ground is
-often in this state, but when it is, it is a little faster,
-a little more susceptible of bump, than anywhere else
-I know) down to Bristol or Southampton after a wet
-day, he is invariably of supreme assistance to his side.
-And what a number of graduated shades of differing
-wickets there are, from the sun-scorched cracking clay,
-where the fast bowler finds your fingers, or failing
-these your ribs, where your runs are made through
-the slips or first hop over their heads to the boundary,
-down through the varying degrees of good, natural,
-fast wickets to the Valhalla of batsmen, let us say
-Taunton, the Oval, or Bristol, where the ball rarely
-rises stump high, and where there is as much life in
-the wickets as there is in a barrel of oysters! On
-grounds like these the batsman assuredly cometh into
-his own, and metaphorically layeth the bowler by the
-heel, bruising him hip and thigh through the weary
-hours of an August day, till the welcome news of the
-last over revives the rag of a man that is left, and he
-slowly wends his way to the rabbit-hutch, in sore need
-of the well-earned bath and its ensuing rub down&mdash;in
-sore need of a ginger beer. Perhaps there are too
-many of these superexcellent wickets; perhaps, from
-certain batsmen’s point of view, there are not. But
-the moment the rain appears, the bowler is another
-being; in the language of the card-room, he wears a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span>
-four-ace smile, and there is a corresponding depression
-in the countenance of the great batsman. All down
-the still more numerous phases of wet, sticky, and
-real bird-lime wickets (impossible for nine out of ten
-batsmen)&mdash;down through all these the four-ace smile
-remains, and it is only when we arrive at the
-thoroughly sodden ground, with a faint drizzle or
-slight showers at convenient intervals, when the ball
-is wet, the footholds greasy, and there are bucketfuls
-of sawdust besprinkled here, there, and everywhere,
-that the batsman again reverses the situation,
-and, like an overfed fox-terrier, has acquired another
-poor rat of a bowler.</p>
-
-<p>I say overfed advisedly&mdash;not that he is replete
-with runs on too many occasions in an ordinary
-season, when a fair amount of rain falls, and the
-good and bad wickets are allotted us fairly evenly,
-and a decent percentage of catches are held (which is
-very seldom the case); but when he glues himself for
-a day or day and a half to some easy-paced billiard-table
-wicket, where a blind boy could stay with a
-toothpick, I say he is overfed&mdash;he gluts himself
-with runs; and though, as I have said before, he has,
-in my humble opinion, less chances of distinguishing
-himself than the medium-paced bowler, and is in
-consequence of less value to his side (which, after
-all, is the very essence of the game), yet when his
-opportunity arises he overeats himself to an astonishing
-degree, and often grouses to a similar extent as the
-rat of a bowler catches him by the tail with a duck
-and one on a wicket of sun-baked clay.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>I have sorely digressed, but the trend of the
-digression was this, that if as a youth you wish to
-play cricket, devote all your time, all your energies,
-to bowling. A great bowler is born, not made; but
-though you may never soar to the heights of a
-Spofforth or a Lohmann, you can learn to bowl a good
-length, you can learn to bowl intelligently, and be a
-source of comfort to yourself, and, what is infinitely
-better, in all probability a source of comfort to your
-side.</p>
-
-<p>We have divided the bowlers of to-day and
-yesterday into four: it were better to say three,
-leaving the few dealers in lobs to huddle themselves
-into a minute band that can nowadays follow many
-leagues behind the great cavalcade that comprises the
-real three divisions. Lobs are occasionally useful
-things to carry round with a side, but should in a
-healthy team be used medicinally.</p>
-
-<p>They act as a stirring tonic to men in the field
-who have grown lazy and careless from lack of work,
-for with all the lobs I have ever seen there is always
-a blissful uncertainty as to where a good batsman
-will place the next one; and some players hit them
-so uncomfortably hard that it is best for the slackers
-to keep their weather eyes open, or they may experience
-a rude awakening. There is no more exhilarating
-spectacle on a cricket-field than to see a drowsy
-dreamer of a field receive the ball in a most unexpected
-place, on the wrist or the ankle, on the nose
-or somewhere where the injury is not likely to be
-serious.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-141.jpg" width="400" height="543" id="i84"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>WILLIAM LILLYWHITE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-142.jpg" width="400" height="537" id="i85"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc14" summary="c14">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>W. Bromley.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>JOHN WISDEN.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Three years ago at the Oval, I remember, Sam
-Woods was watching a match, and a certain individual
-in an immaculate sweater, brilliantly decorated
-in front with letters a foot long, sauntered on to the
-field. It was evidently a part of the game with which
-he had no sympathy. Sam glared down on him, and
-in his terse phraseology commenced&mdash;</p>
-
-<p>“Who’s that feller?”</p>
-
-<p>Some one mentioned a name. “I know,” says
-Sam. “I know the silly bloomer.... He was
-fielding in the country&mdash;I was playing&mdash;up she went
-in the air&mdash;he was fast asleep&mdash;catch her, you fool!&mdash;and
-he caught her&mdash;<i>plumb on the nut</i>.”</p>
-
-<p>And this genial cricketer was pleased for the rest
-of the day at the mere recollection.</p>
-
-<p>At last we have arrived, through devious paths,
-at our three great divisions. Many bowlers whom I
-class as slow may in reality consider themselves to
-be medium; many medium may prefer to be known
-as fast; and perhaps there may be a very few fast
-bowlers who prefer the description of medium&mdash;but
-I doubt it.</p>
-
-<p>First and foremost we must place the Old Man, or
-Old ‘Un, as we so endearingly like to speak of him.
-There can be but few people in this country who do
-not know this full-bearded, full-bodied figure of a
-man&mdash;the few short shuffling strides, the arm a little
-above the shoulder, the right hand a shade in front
-of him, the curious rotary action before delivery, <i>and
-the wonderful length</i>.</p>
-
-<p>The hand is large and the ball well concealed, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span>
-as you face him, for he stands full fronted to you, it
-seems to leave by the back door, as it were, that is,
-over the knuckle of the little finger.</p>
-
-<p>I have played with him many times, but he does
-not seem to me to do very much (of course I am
-speaking of a good wicket), but some come a little
-higher, others a little lower, some a little faster, some
-slower; on the middle leg is his favourite spot&mdash;two
-or three off the leg stick with a square deep who is
-not asleep, then a straighter one with a “bit of top
-on it”&mdash;the batsman tries to push to leg&mdash;there is
-a somewhat excited <i>’s that?</i> and the would-be run-getter
-is sauntering pavilionwards.</p>
-
-<p>Certainly of all the slow bowlers I have met he is
-the most successful against <i>new faces</i>, whether they
-are young or old. He generally bowls them neck and
-crop, or else they are l.b.w., and it makes very little
-difference if the batsman is an Australian wonder,
-or a boy in a village school: they come in and they
-go out, and they can’t understand it&mdash;it looks so
-extremely harmless. They forget the master-hand,
-with the master-mind to work it; they forget the
-wonderful perseverance! If you can’t get them out
-over the wicket, try round; if you can’t succeed
-this end, have a rest and try the other.</p>
-
-<p>To-day he may bowl a trifle slower than he did
-twenty years ago. It seems to me, however, that he
-bowls with very much the same effect. He is a
-bowler that stands by himself. As long as I can
-remember, no one has ever compared “W. G.” with
-any other bowler; he stands alone&mdash;it is a distinct<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span>
-form of attack. We hear of Rhodes being contrasted
-with Peel, and Peel discussed in relation to Peate,
-and so on in thousands of instances, but the Old Man
-stands by himself, with a style, a method, a success of
-his own.</p>
-
-<p>Of really good amateur slow bowlers, during the
-last twelve years, in which time I have been more or
-less nearly connected with first-class cricket, there has
-been a phenomenal dearth.</p>
-
-<p>They can literally be counted on the fingers of a
-man’s hand. As I write only two stand out&mdash;C. L.
-Townsend and C. M. Wells. Of course there have
-been others, and there are others, but unless I have
-missed my way through the long lists of bowlers
-through which I have passed, I have lighted on no
-names that, without some slight stretch of the
-imagination, one could place on anything like the
-same level with the two already mentioned. Should
-there be any, I sincerely apologise for their omission.
-A. G. Steel and E. A. Nepean never entered into my
-short first-class cricket experiences.</p>
-
-<p>I have met them both, however, in club games,
-and even with the small amount of natural and
-acquired intelligence at my disposal, I could not fail
-to see how good they must have been at their best.</p>
-
-<p>One feat of Nepean’s I remember well. He was
-playing for the Gentlemen <i>v.</i> the Players at the Oval.
-Arthur Shrewsbury was batting, and Nepean was
-bowling, if my recollection fails me not, at the gas-works
-end, and, greatly to the astonishment of many
-of us present, <i>bowled him round his legs!</i></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Great as was the astonishment of the spectators, it
-paled before the wonder of the two in question, and
-the tale went round on the morrow that gentle sleep
-had failed to visit their respective couches on the
-evening of this memorable day. One was said to
-have lain awake all night marvelling <i>how on earth he
-had done it</i>, and the other <i>how on earth he had let it
-be done!</i></p>
-
-<p>Whether the tale be of truth or otherwise I know
-not, but it was a ball that probably Nepean will
-remember long after he has ceased playing even club
-cricket.</p>
-
-<p>The one exception that proves the rule that great
-bowlers are born and not made is C. M. Wells. To
-the best of my belief, when he started his career at
-Dulwich as a bowler, he was of the shut-your-eyes,
-bang-’em-down, never-mind-where-but-plug-’em-down
-style. Only a slight success, I think, attended
-his efforts in this direction, and so, having seen some
-good slow bowler on the school ground, assiduously
-worked day after day at the nets, until up at Cambridge
-he proved himself to be on his day one of the
-finest slow bowlers we have seen. He possessed, and
-still possesses, a wonderful command of length, with
-plenty of spin from the off&mdash;a considerable variation
-of flight&mdash;a slower ball with several inches of break
-from leg, delivered, by the way, from almost the
-palm of the hand, and a ball that, as it comes sailing
-up the pitch towards you, has every appearance of
-being intended for a leg break, but which in reality
-is simply propelled with a large quantity of “top on.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span>”
-It comes naturally quick off the ground, and it
-comes along straight as a die, and many a batsman
-has ceased from troubling, out l.b.w., through playing
-for a break that did not exist. I should perhaps
-not have said ceased from troubling, for it is a
-curious fact, and one for which there seems no
-adequate explanation, that though a batsman generally
-grumbles a little at being given out l.b.w. to a
-fast bowler, a <i>rara avis</i> is occasionally found agreeing
-with the decision; men as a rule grumble and trouble
-themselves vastly being dismissed in a similar manner
-to a slow ball, and a <i>rara avis</i> in this connection is
-almost as the dodo.</p>
-
-<p>Of Wells’ fast ball I am perhaps not so eulogistic,
-but no doubt he uses it as an astute hunter uses dead
-wood and briars to cover the many pitfalls into
-which his intended victims are to cast themselves.
-This end or that end, he never tires; if the laws of
-the game permitted it he would bowl both; and as
-regards fielding his own bowling, I think he is the
-best I have ever seen. I remember once at Cambridge
-in the Long Vac. playing with him&mdash;I think
-it was against the M.C.C. I know the side included
-Shacklock and Barnes. The latter was batting,
-and Wells let go a slow full pitch, and poor old
-Barnes dashed at it as a dog at a dinner. Wells, as
-he generally is, was well up the wicket, his legs well
-apart, looking for what he could find. Barnes found
-the full toss, and Wells the ball. As the veteran
-passed me at mid-off, his face was as the face of a
-man who stoops to pick up a sovereign and finds a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span>
-brass button. It was the hardest catch, I should
-think, ever made at a range of 10 yards from the
-gun, and Barnes was no niggard with the wood!</p>
-
-<p>Having played with and against Wells a great
-many times, I have had copious opportunities of
-watching him closely. He invariably starts with
-the ball in the left hand, and in the first stride or
-two throws it into his right. For the off break it
-falls into a cradle of fingers; the middle digits are
-spread open, while the first and fourth are bent
-double at the second joint. The ball rarely touches
-the thumb; the natural straightening of the first
-finger at the moment of delivery imparts the required
-break; but to bowl a length without the use
-of the thumb, and to train your fingers to fall at will
-into this cramped position, involves considerably more
-patience and practice than the average cricketer cares
-to give.</p>
-
-<p>Here again I shall digress. In all the excellent
-works on cricket that at one time or another I have
-so diligently studied, I find most elaborate instructions
-on this same subject, the holding of the ball&mdash;“Always
-use your fingers,” “Never use the palm
-of the hand,” etc., etc.; but despite all this worthy
-advice, I have never yet seen two bowlers gather
-their fingers, or fingers and thumb, round the ball in
-such a manner that the hand of one could not for
-an instant be confused with the hand of the other.
-The length of their run may occasionally coincide,
-very occasionally their stride may be of the same
-compass, but these are the only two similar characteristics<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span>
-which any two bowlers may be said to
-possess. The action and method of handling the
-ball are as different in different bowlers as the
-features on the face of the one are unlike the features
-on the faces of the others. George Lohmann, one
-of the greatest bowlers that has ever lived, spread his
-long, sinuous fingers (in which I include the thumb) at
-almost equal distances round the whole circumference
-of the ball. Spofforth, on the other, held only half the
-ball, the little finger underneath, with the thumb on
-the top, both resting on the seam&mdash;believing, as at
-billiards, that a ball struck on one side will of necessity
-spin in its run or flight in the direction of the
-side to which the propelling force was given. Turner,
-on the other hand, covered the whole of the circumference,
-with the ball resting nearer the palm of the
-hand than is the case with the majority. Mead,
-again, being blessed with a long, strong forefinger,
-produces the same off break with this finger and the
-slight use of his thumb and second finger. Those
-who have played against Albert Trott know well the
-particular delivery when they see part of the ball
-projecting below his little finger, and the strong
-thumb standing straight up in the air; it is practically
-propelled by the second, third, and fourth
-fingers. I give these simply as a few instances.
-Every bowler, whether first class, second class, or
-“no class,” has a peculiar method of his own,
-some idiosyncrasy, however slight, in his manner of
-gripping the ball, and this, too, <i>in addition</i> to
-the varying flexibility, the varying “flicks” or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span>
-“whips” of the wrist, that each in his very own
-way employs.</p>
-
-<p>Now for C. L. Townsend&mdash;by accident this is a
-suggestive phrase, and one that in his prime exactly
-describes the plan of action adopted by the incoming
-batsmen&mdash;“Now for Charles,” “Go for him”&mdash;and
-they went; and a great number came back sorrowing&mdash;bowled
-round their legs with a two-foot break,
-stumped a couple of yards, caught at cover trying
-to drive, bowled with an off break or a fast one&mdash;out
-in every possible way. Bowling with a high,
-shambling action, he was very deceptive in the flight
-and very deceptive in the pace, the ball coming slow
-in air and fast off the pitch with as much finger leg
-break as he wanted.</p>
-
-<p>On a sticky wicket, unlike the majority of slow
-leg break bowlers, he could, if he wished, leave it
-alone and rely almost entirely with very satisfactory
-results on the off break, bowled a bit faster. And,
-like Wells, he could bowl all day, and did until towards
-the end of his regular cricket career, when he
-forsook the stony path that a regular first-class bowler
-must tread for the scented groves where dwell our
-great batsmen, and, lapped in the luxury of 2000
-runs per annum, forsook to a great extent his former
-mistress.</p>
-
-<p>Among all the famous slow left-handers there is
-one that to me stands out more clearly than the rest,
-whether his striking personality&mdash;for who did not
-know that bouncing ball of a man?&mdash;whether his
-wonderful all-round skill, or his possession of that
-golden quality on a cricket field, the golden quality
-of <i>life</i>, stood uppermost in my mind, I cannot say,
-but to this day, as often as I think on the game,
-there always arises the short, thick-set figure of poor
-Johnny Briggs.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-151.jpg" width="400" height="538" id="i92"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc15" summary="c15">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>W. Bromley.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>ALFRED MYNN.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-152.jpg" width="400" height="553" id="i93"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>JAS. COBBETT.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Buffoon, perhaps, at times, but never with an
-obnoxious buffoonery. And what a bowler! The
-ball left his hand with a finger flick that you could
-hear in the pavilion, and here was every known
-variety of flight: three or four short, half walking,
-half running strides, and the ball was at you, spinning
-like a top; first a balloon of a ball that would drop
-much farther off than you thought, a lower one just
-on the same spot, both breaking away like smoke;
-then another, with nothing on, straight at the sticks;
-and then you saw the arm come round a shade
-faster, and, if you weren’t on the watch, you found
-you had struck a snag in the form of a really fast
-yorker, bowled at a considerably greater pace than
-you have ever received one from either Peel or
-Rhodes. Poor Johnny! I have no space to dilate
-further on your wonderful gift of bowling with this
-indefinite “<i>you</i>.” In conclusion, as this chapter seems
-rapidly to be casting itself into the mould of personal
-reminiscence, I will relate my last two meetings with
-you.</p>
-
-<p>We were playing at Hastings in the Week.
-“W. G.” was in command. It was my lucky day,
-having made 50 or so by blind slogging, and the
-liberal help of a sluggish field. The Doctor suggested
-you should try the Chapel end. I took 28 off the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span>
-first three overs, six of them fours, mostly well off
-the off stump, bouncing up against the canvas at
-square leg. I remember the aggrieved look on
-your face as you remarked to the Old Man,
-“That’s not much of a stroke, Doctor,” and the
-Doctor answered, “It’s all right if you can do it,
-Johnny”; and then, Johnny, you were taken off.</p>
-
-<p>We were playing at Lord’s, North <i>v.</i> South. It
-was a perfect wicket. I was in need of a few runs
-to end the season with. Poor Johnny was bowling,
-and bowling as well as ever, a bit faster on the fast
-wicket, and going considerably with his arm.</p>
-
-<p>“W. G.” had made as good a 130 as he ever made
-in his life. I went to the wicket, played two, and
-the leg stump leant wearily back with a ball that
-pitched on the middle and off&mdash;0!</p>
-
-<p>The second innings, through the clemency of
-Ernest Smith, I avoided a pair. I got to the other
-end and faced Johnny: the same ball, the same
-languid attitude of the same stump, and the balance
-was mightily in your favour, Johnny, as it always
-was.</p>
-
-<p>He was a great bowler on his day, a bowler that
-was never done with, and the void he has left on the
-cricket field will not be filled for many a day, if ever
-it be filled at all.</p>
-
-<p>The mind of every cricketer naturally associates
-with the memory of Briggs the names of the other
-two great left-handers, Peel and Rhodes; and what
-a wonderfully successful trio they have been, and
-what an amount of amiable argument has been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span>
-expended in the vain attempt to decide which is the
-greatest of the three! I prefer to bracket the three.
-And as no side is thoroughly equipped for attack
-without the inclusion of a bowler of this stamp, had
-the captain of a side the first call on the services of
-these two, he no doubt would include Peel on a fast
-wicket, and in the event of the rain falling, would
-give the preference to Rhodes. The smile on the
-face of either of them after a goodly shower, and an
-hour or two’s stickying sun, has struck terror into
-the heart of many a creditable run-getter.</p>
-
-<p>My first experience of Peel was at Cambridge.
-As usual, and rightly too, my place was number
-eleven on the list. There was six minutes to time, and
-the good MacGregor told me to buck up and go in.
-So into the dark I went, and, backed by the luck
-that sometimes falls to most undeserving persons,
-I stayed through an over and a half of Robert&mdash;not
-out 0 at night, and my last game for the ‘Varsity!
-On the morrow, on not a very easy wicket, my
-marvellous luck remained with me, and stayed with
-me even until lunch! 41! It must have been a
-dreary show. I only instance this to once again
-emphasise the old old truism of what a game of
-chance this cricket is. Here was I playing in my
-last match, playing as a bowler, but, as the vulgar
-say, “couldn’t bowl for toffee,” or any other desirable
-sweetmeat. Here was I, number eleven, and
-by a kindly turn of fortune’s wheel allowed to stop
-Bobby Peel for two hours and a half. Well, that
-six minutes in the dusk gave me ten years’ cricket,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span>
-so <i>I</i> have nothing to grumble at in the luck of the
-game!</p>
-
-<p>As every one knows, Yorkshire owe much of
-their great success to the efforts of these two. Always
-to be relied upon&mdash;always ready to bowl either
-end for two or twenty overs at a stretch: bowlers
-that a captain can put on for an over, and knowing
-that neither of them will throw away a couple of
-fours trying to find their length. Should we compare
-the actions of the two, we must award the
-palm for style and easy rhythmic swing to Peel.
-To Rhodes we must allow the greater amount of
-spin.</p>
-
-<p>Wilfred, as his intimates designate him, for some
-years had a bad time when he journeyed with his
-friends to the Oval, for he nearly always struck a
-fast wicket, and very few bowlers are affected to the
-same extent as he is by the varying conditions of the
-ground.</p>
-
-<p>On the Oval we have generally managed to score
-against him, provided it is fine; but give him a little
-rain, and he gets his own and a bit more back. I
-remember, three years ago, at Kennington, Yorkshire
-and Surrey both made over 300. On the
-third day of the match there had been rain, and a
-blistering sun was doing its best to give the spectators
-their money’s worth in the afternoon. In this it
-succeeded. Yorkshire held a lead of about 25.
-“Another drawn match, I suppose,” was heard on
-every side; but the members and their friends don’t
-quite realise the enormous difference of Rhodes, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span>
-of Rhodes and Haigh coupled, on a dry and on a
-sticky wicket.</p>
-
-<p>Latterly, Surrey have been anything but a good
-side on a bad wicket, and those of us that knew this
-were by no means so happy in our minds, and our
-dismal forebodings came very nearly being realised.
-Haigh at the pavilion end and Rhodes at the gasometer
-did exactly as they liked. The former, with
-practically only three men on the off and innumerable
-short legs and silly mid-ons, bowled a perfect
-length off the off stump, coming back anything from
-three inches to a foot. Only once during the sorry
-rot that ensued did he get hit on the off. Rhodes,
-now a totally different bowler from the day before,
-plugged away on the off stump, and did exactly as he
-liked with the ball.</p>
-
-<p><i>Four wickets for 8</i>, and an hour and a bit to go!
-Poor old Surrey in the soup again! It certainly
-looked like it, for the mouldy eight runs on the tins
-were only hoisted there by a mighty effort and a
-considerable amount of luck. All out 15; and it
-would have been so had not Hayward stayed forty-five
-minutes, amassing another 8, and for Tom
-Richardson’s pluckily slogged 17. The total, I
-think, reached by devious and rugged, very rugged
-paths, 51&mdash;and so Yorkshire were robbed of a well-earned
-victory. Rhodes had his own back, as he
-always does have it back when sun and rain put their
-heads together and strive strenuously for his welfare.</p>
-
-<p>On another occasion that I recollect we made the
-handsome compilation of 37 against him and Wainwright<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span>
-at Bradford. The score-sheet was covered
-with “Stumped Hunter, b. Rhodes, 0.” It was a
-most catching complaint, and five of us succumbed
-to it. It attacked us in two distinct varieties. We
-either played forward and slipped&mdash;“Stumped
-Hunter, b. Rhodes, 0,” or we charged gaily up
-the pitch for home or glory. The result was precisely
-the same&mdash;“Stumped Hunter, b. Rhodes, 0.”</p>
-
-<p>But enough of Rhodes. Helped by his two good
-god-parents, sun and rain, the subject is a painful
-one to us of the south.</p>
-
-<p>His co-helper in this match, Wainwright, is
-another bowler to whom the varying conditions of
-weather, and consequently of wickets, makes a
-phenomenal difference&mdash;perhaps more strikingly pronounced
-even than to Rhodes.</p>
-
-<p>Harmless enough on a good wicket, on a bad
-one he could make the ball do what he liked. Many,
-of course, can do this; but they cannot make it
-turn with the astonishing rapidity from the pitch
-that Wainwright could. Slow in its flight, yet on
-touching the mud it would rush at you&mdash;I had
-almost said bite you&mdash;at any rate bowl you as you
-were playing back for the hang.</p>
-
-<p>And now, my indulgent reader, we will make full
-sail southwards, with the brave north wind full astern,
-to the headquarters of the cricketing world, the
-abode of the all-powerful M.C.C. Here we find a
-slow bowler; I call him slow, for though bowling
-every conceivable pace, I always maintain that he is
-at his best when four or five out of the six sent down
-are leisurely in their progress up the pitch, mixed
-up with one or two so exceedingly fast that “eye
-cannot follow them in their flight.” I refer to Trott,
-or “Alberto,” as he is generally called.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-159.jpg" width="400" height="571" id="i98"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>WILLIAM LILLYWHITE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-160.jpg" width="400" height="646" id="i99"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>WILLIAM CLARKE</i>,</p>
- <p class="pcapn"><i>Famous for Underhand Bowling</i>.</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>A bowler of infinite resource&mdash;at times no doubt
-he gives many runs away through the persistence
-with which he tries new theories, new dodges, or a
-new action; but he is one of the few bowlers that the
-batsman is compelled to watch more closely than
-many another. Personally, I have retired from the
-conflict with Albert through every one of the exceedingly
-varied methods by which he has removed
-obstructing batsmen. As a rule he bowls with a
-decidedly low action, with any amount of off break on&mdash;with
-every degree of pace. Again the ball is held
-in the last three fingers, and a powerful upright
-thumb confronts the player opposed to him; this is
-generally a “pull-backed” one which hangs most
-uncomfortably in the air. The next comes as the
-lightning, and as likely as not catches you full pitch
-on the toe, or hits the bottom of the stumps as you
-are lifting the bat to play. At his best (for sometimes
-I have seen him bowl for hours without employing
-his fast one) it is as fast a ball as one wishes to meet,
-and its pace is made in the last of the few short
-steps Trott takes. Should he be unsuccessful, he
-will suddenly raise his arm and deliver one right over
-his head at a medium pace, which very often whips
-back sharply from the off, or, reverting to something
-like his original action, he will bowl an over or two
-of slow leg breaks, which, if their length is not all it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span>
-should be, break about as much as Harry Trott was
-wont to break, and that is saying a good deal.</p>
-
-<p>He is a bowler that I have never seen tired, and
-a wonderful gatherer of unconsidered trifles in the
-way of almost impossible “c. and b.’s.” He stands
-in front of you like a brick wall, and you’ve got to
-hit it mighty hard for him to let it go by. Truly a
-great worker, this Anglo-Australian, as the papers so
-frequently call him.</p>
-
-<p>At Taunton, a year or two ago, we invariably came
-across the slowest overhand bowler that has played
-in first-class cricket for ten years or so. Tyler was
-for a long time the stumbling-block in the way of
-many sides, more particularly of Surrey. Time
-after time he has bowled us out on all sorts of
-wickets&mdash;it was too slow, too high in the air, and
-consequently such a long time coming to you.
-Dozens of players I have seen bowled trying to
-sniggle one to leg, and if they were not bowled they
-were out l.b.w. Of course he has been “planted”
-again and again into the churchyard, but he knew
-what he was doing, and a ball a little higher or a
-little shorter found a resting-place in the safe hands
-of Palairet or Daniell on the pavilion rails. He has
-much to thank Sam Woods for. Wicket after wicket
-has he got at mid-off through Sam’s fearless fielding,
-and run after run has he been saved. A great many
-cautious batsmen, too, have been irritated into hitting
-through the close proximity of Sam at silly point, and
-this silly point to a bowler of Tyler’s pace is no
-sinecure, even with the most gentle of batsmen. I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span>
-often wonder that this placing of a man right under
-the batsman’s nose is not more often adopted, as the
-result seems always to justify it, for whether you get
-the man out or not, he is most decidedly put off his
-game. It is not, however, a place to go to sleep in, even
-with the mildest of performers. I was sorry that Tyler
-should have been no-balled at the close of his career,
-for the day on which he was penalised there seemed
-to be no difference whatever from the action he
-always had, and which was universally passed for
-years.</p>
-
-<p>Of the leg-break bowlers there is Braund, one of
-the best all-round cricketers of the day. He is
-second only in the matter of pace to Vine, and he is
-easily first in the matter of length and direction&mdash;perhaps
-not so difficult as Vine is at his best, but he
-always bowls well, consistently well, on all sorts of
-wickets, and he is never punished to the extent the
-other bowlers of this class are when one is lucky
-enough to catch them on an off day.</p>
-
-<p>There are many other slow bowlers of whom I
-should like to scribble, but time presses, and we must
-pass on to our second division, to the bowlers of the
-medium pace, whose numbers are as sands on the
-seashore.</p>
-
-<p>There is very little doubt that the bowlers who
-comprise this our second division are in the majority
-of instances of more general value to their side than
-the faster bowlers, for the obvious reason that they
-can always obtain a foothold.</p>
-
-<p>They can also bowl longer at a stretch, they can<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span>
-vary their pace, they can alter the whole principle of
-their attack to suit the varying stages of a wicket in
-a way that is given to very few of our really fast
-bowlers. There are, too, so many that one must include
-in this class, that it is a matter of considerable
-difficulty to make anything like an adequate selection.
-There are some, however, whose names will immediately
-occur to the minds of every average cricketer.</p>
-
-<p>I asked W. G. Grace not long ago, “Who was
-the best medium-paced bowler you ever played
-against?” Almost without thought the answer
-came back, “George Lohmann”; and there is many
-another player who, asked the same question, would
-make answer in a similar strain.</p>
-
-<p>We all knew that tall, fair-haired, broad, rather
-high-shouldered figure&mdash;a splendid worker in every
-section of the game. Great as the pleasure was in
-studiously watching the man bowl, or watching him
-bat, taking the extraordinary risks he did, to my
-mind an almost equally enjoyable thing was to watch
-him at extra slip. Before his time there were good
-slips, bad slips, fast-asleep slips, and since his time
-every variety of “slipper” has passed across the
-stage, but none ever had the same catlike activity,
-the same second-sight to practically foretell the flight,
-the pace of a ball, and the same safe pair of hands to
-hold it in.</p>
-
-<p>But I am presumably writing on bowling and
-not fielding. The following description of George
-Lohmann by C. B. Fry is one of the very best things
-of the many that he has done:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span></p>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>He made his own style of bowling, and a beautiful style
-it was&mdash;so beautiful that none but a decent cricketer could
-fully appreciate it. He had a high right-over action, which
-was naturally easy and free-swinging, but, in his seeking
-after variations of pace, he introduced into it just a suspicion&mdash;a
-mere suspicion&mdash;of laboriousness. Most people, I
-believe, considered his action to have been perfect. To the
-eye it was rhythmical and polished, but it cost him, probably,
-more effort than it appeared to do. His normal pace was
-medium; he took a run of moderate length, poised himself
-with a slight uplifting of his high square shoulders, and
-delivered the ball just before his hand reached the top of its
-circular swing, and, in the act of delivery, he seemed first
-to urge forward the upper part of his body in sympathy
-with his arm, and then allow it to follow through after the
-ball. Owing to his naturally high delivery, the ball described
-a pronounced curve, and dropped rather sooner than the
-batsman expected. This natural peculiarity he developed
-assiduously into a very deceptive ball which he appeared to
-bowl the same pace as the rest, but which he really, as it
-were, held back, causing the unwary and often the wary to
-play too soon. He was a perfect master of the whole art of
-varying his pace without betraying the variation to the
-batsman. He ran up and delivered the ball, to all appearances,
-exactly similarly each time; but one found now that
-the ball was hanging in the air, now that it was on to one
-surprisingly soon. He had complete control of his length,
-and very, very rarely&mdash;unless intentionally&mdash;dropped a ball
-too short or too far up. He had a curious power of making
-one feel a half-volley was on its way; but the end was
-usually a perfect length ball or a yorker. He had that subtle
-finger power which makes the ball spin, and consequently
-he could both make the ball break on a biting wicket and
-make it “nip along quick” on a true one. He made a
-practice of using both sides of the wicket on sticky pitches.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span>
-If he found he was breaking too much, he would change
-from over to round the wicket, and on fast pitches he soon
-had a go round the wicket at a batsman who appeared comfortable
-at the other sort. But he was full of artifices and
-subtleties, and he kept on trying them all day, each as persistently
-as the others, one after another. With all his skill,
-he would never have achieved his great feats but for his
-insistence of purpose. He was what I call a very hostile
-bowler; he made one feel he was one’s deadly enemy, and
-he used to put many batsmen off their strokes by his masterful
-and confident manner with the ball. He was by far the
-most difficult medium-pace bowler I ever played on a good
-wicket.</p></blockquote>
-
-<p>In the spring of a year eighteen summers ago
-three or four of us were playing cricket on the
-wilderness of Clapham Common. A young man
-watched the game for a little, and eventually took a
-hand. He bowled to us and he batted for us, and
-we learnt something. At the end of half an hour he
-left. We asked his name. “Lohmann,” came the
-reply. We said, “Good-morning, and thank you.”
-And to-day I think that there are dozens of committeemen
-all over the country, and especially in the
-county of Surrey, who would like to go out into the
-same or a similar wilderness and encounter another
-George Lohmann. They may go out hot haste to
-find one, but they will return empty-handed.</p>
-
-<p>In reply to the same question that I asked W. G.
-Grace, Ranjitsinhji said, “Noble.” Now of Noble I
-have not had sufficient experience to write, so I asked
-him again, and the next answer was, “Jack Hearne”;
-and for perfection of action, with its open-shouldered,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span>
-almost three-quarter arm swing, I have never seen
-his equal. He has every variation of pace, and, on a
-wicket that suits him, as much off break as he wants;
-and he bowls, or did bowl at his best, a length that
-only a very few bowlers like Alfred Shaw ever excelled.
-It has been said that on a perfect wicket he
-plays a man in. Well, perhaps he does; but those of
-us who on a sticky wicket at Lord’s&mdash;and at Lord’s a
-sticky wicket spells perdition&mdash;have had the temerity
-to stand up against him, bowling as he nearly always
-is from the pavilion end, know with what difficulty
-he can be stopped, and with what superhuman effort
-scored off.</p>
-
-<p>Two other great medium-paced bowlers appeal
-immediately to the player of cricket&mdash;Attewell and
-Mead&mdash;both of a wonderful length, and doing a bit
-either way, not in the same way as Jack Hearne,
-who is practically an off break bowler, with a fast ball
-going with his arm, but with distinctive finger or
-hand break going both ways.</p>
-
-<p>Who does not remember Attewell’s easy, full-faced
-run up to the wicket, the splendid control of
-length&mdash;a very machine, but a machine with an
-untiring human intelligence. Both these two are
-perfect gluttons for work&mdash;this end, the other end,
-both ends, all day and probably all night if the span
-of the hours for play were lengthened. Attewell I
-should have taken on a good wicket, and Mead on
-a bad.</p>
-
-<p>The latter I remember years ago at Broxbourne,
-where he and I led the attack for the local club, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span>
-wonderfully successful he was; but in those days he
-bowled almost entirely leg breaks, and it was only,
-I believe, after journeying Leytonwards, that he
-developed the off theory, with an occasional straight
-one and with an occasional leg break, that ultimately
-gave him the position amongst great bowlers that he
-holds to-day.</p>
-
-<p>Lancashire some seasons ago possessed a quartette
-that very few sides have been able to equal. I refer
-to Briggs, Hallam, Cuttell, and Mold. Each of the
-four obtained a hundred wickets. Lancashire were
-playing at the Oval; the wicket was on the slow
-side, not very difficult and not very easy; each of
-the four had a turn, and in this particular match
-Hallam bowled extremely well. In my own mind
-he was at his best one of the most difficult of
-medium-paced bowlers, for the flight was so deceptive.
-He has a good variation of pace, but the
-bad luck he has had in his health has clung to him in
-the matter of bowling&mdash;there seem to be more missed
-chances, more balls that beat the bat and evade the
-wicket, than fall to the lot of many another bowler
-in the same class.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-169.jpg" width="400" height="279" id="i106"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>LORDS GROUND EARLY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-170.jpg" width="400" height="268" id="i107"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-
-<table id="tc16" summary="c16">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Water-Colour by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>H. Alken.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>ONE ARM AND ONE LEG MATCH.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In the matter of length, in the knowledge of the
-art of bowling, in his phenomenal success, there is
-one man in this our second division who occupies
-an almost unique position&mdash;Alfred Shaw. Every one
-knows the records that he holds, but there is one
-thing that at the time of its occurrence certainly was
-the subject of much gratifying comment, and this
-was Alfred Shaw’s astonishing resurrection in first-class
-cricket, which hardly to-day receives the recognition
-that it merits. Sussex journeyed to the Oval.
-Shaw, who for a considerable time had given up first-class
-cricket, was included in the side, and those of
-us who were playing against him saw and realised
-one of the finest pieces of bowling ever given on a
-perfect Oval wicket. Surrey’s score was well over
-300. Shaw bowled one end and then the other till
-he had completed 50 overs. <i>During this time only 60
-odd runs had been scored from him</i>, and there were
-seven Surrey victims labelled Shaw in the score-sheet.
-He bowled as only a marker could bowl, and every
-man that proceeded to the wicket either played a bit
-too soon or a bit too late at some period or other of
-his innings. It was a remarkable bowling performance,
-and remarkable evidence of stamina of a bowler
-not in the first flush of youth.</p>
-
-<p>Another in this same class, and who at the start
-of his career was engaged on the staff at the Oval
-with his future club-mate Hulme, was George
-Davidson, a fast medium bowler with a longish run
-and an imperturbable length&mdash;full of life and vigour,
-and a man whose place in the side Derbyshire have
-not yet been enabled to fill.</p>
-
-<p>Tate, like Rhodes, is again a cricketer to whom
-the state of a wicket makes a phenomenal difference,
-even more so than is usually the case. Given
-suitable conditions, there are few bowlers that can
-make the ball come up faster off the pitch than
-Tate. He bowls a really good length, and can
-apply the off break at will, and for years has stepped<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span>
-into the breach for Sussex and saved the rest of his
-side many many wearying hours of fielding. And
-now to make an end of our second division we will
-include F. S. Jackson and J. R. Mason. It is a very
-moot point whether they should be termed fast or
-medium&mdash;let us say they are fast-medium. It really
-does not matter much what we call them, for any
-one whose patience has held out thus far in this
-article has no doubt seen them both bowl again and
-again. F. S. Jackson is a confident bowler; he bowls
-with a confidence born of the past, and with an unlimited
-confidence in the future, and to this self-reliance
-I attribute a large proportion of his success.
-Bowling fast-medium, with an occasional off break
-and an occasional slow ball, he invariably manages to
-keep the runs down, and at the same time to take
-his quota of wickets; and a bowler that can go with
-Sam Woods through the whole of a Gentlemen <i>v.</i>
-Players match unchanged must be a really good
-bowler, even though as we watch him we cannot
-exactly determine how he succeeds as he undoubtedly
-does.</p>
-
-<p>J. R. Mason is probably a bit faster than Jackson.
-He has a free upstanding delivery, an easy run up to
-the wicket, and a full-arm swing. He bowls a good
-length just off the off stump, and on his day and
-with a wicket in his favour can make the ball do a
-lot from the off. Sam Woods said that he had
-never in his life seen much better bowling than
-Mason’s in the Somerset <i>v.</i> Kent match at Taunton
-in August 1901. The home side were dismissed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span>
-for 74 and 78, Mason’s share of the wickets being
-four for 26 and <i>eight for 29</i>, an excellent performance
-for any amateur on any wicket.</p>
-
-<p>The last of our three divisions now claims our
-limited attention, and here it would be as well if I
-made yet another apology: the names of many of the
-great Australian bowlers have been omitted from
-these pages, from the fact that I have so seldom
-played against them. Of Giffen, Palmer, Turner,
-Ferris, Jones, and the “Demon Spofforth” I wish I
-could write, but what I could say of them would be
-as the sum of the runs I should in all probability
-have made against them. As I said before, to the
-cricketer who has got his heart and soul in the
-game, there is nothing much more exhilarating than
-the sleepy field being rudely awakened to a just
-sense of his duties. Speaking from a spectator’s
-point of view, there is nothing more exciting than
-to watch the uprooting of the sticks, to note their
-gyration in the direction of the glorified long stop,
-and to follow the flight of a bail for fifty or sixty
-yards. To this end we must possess ourselves of a
-really fast bowler.</p>
-
-<p>The best natural fast bowler, taken at the zenith
-of his fame, was Tom Richardson. Those of us that
-have watched him pounding away hour after hour and
-day after day at the Oval, have marvelled much at
-the wonderful natural spin, and have marvelled
-perhaps more at his inexhaustible energy and neverending
-fund of good-humour. He was never tired
-and never out of sorts, and when the wicket was badly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span>
-broken I have known him time after time slacken
-his great pace for fear of injuring an opposing
-batsman. Always, and rightly too, one of the most
-popular players that ever stepped on to a cricket-field,
-still to-day, when perhaps his prime is past, there
-is no figure more welcome to the thousands that
-throng our grounds than the figure of “Long Tom,”
-as the crowds delight to call him. It was indeed a
-gustable tit-bit to watch him in 1894 bowl Essex out
-at the Oval, taking the whole ten wickets himself.</p>
-
-<p>A noteworthy fact in connection with Richardson,
-in the four years when he aggregated over 1000
-wickets, was the great success he met with on all
-sorts and conditions of wickets. He could be quite as
-deadly in the slime or on a drying wicket as on the
-fieriest piece of asphalt. Now this ubiquitous wicket-taking
-is given to practically no fast bowler that I have
-ever seen, with the exception of Spofforth, and he did
-it not by bowling his usual great pace, as was the
-case with Richardson, but by slowing himself down
-to the speed of a Haigh or a Jack Hearne.</p>
-
-<p>It is the general opinion of many of our greatest
-cricketers&mdash;W. G. Grace and Ranjitsinhji, for example&mdash;that
-on a fast good wicket, and when bowling at
-the top of his form, we have never known the equal
-of Lockwood. Bowling with a long bouncing run,
-he can make the ball flick higher and faster from the
-pitch than any other bowler in this our third class.
-There is at times the very devil in it, and when the
-ball is not rapping incontinently at your fingers, it is
-hitting the middle and leg from well outside the off
-stump. One of the finest balls bowled that failed to
-get a wicket was bowled by Lockwood to Ranjitsinhji
-at the Oval three or four seasons ago.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-175.jpg" width="400" height="294" id="i110"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcapn"><i>From an Engraving Published in 1784.</i></p>
- <p class="pcap"><i>A MATCH AT THE GENTLEMAN’S CLUB, WHITE CONDUIT HOUSE, ISLINGTON.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>I was standing at mid-off, and can see it to this day.
-Ranjitsinhji had just come in to bat, and was, I think,
-still on the mark. It was very fast; it pitched three
-to four inches off the off stump, and came back like
-lightning. I listened for the pleasing rattle of the
-sticks, but at the eleventh hour&mdash;no, I had better say
-the last hundredth part of a second&mdash;Ranjitsinhji’s
-right leg was bent across, and he received it full on
-the thigh. There was no other player living who,
-having failed to stop it with his bat, could have got
-his leg there in time. He certainly acquired a bruise,
-but the pain of this surely and swiftly dwindled in an
-innings of over 190!</p>
-
-<p>One of the finest victories Surrey ever won over
-Yorkshire was at the Oval. On a perfect wicket
-Surrey scored over 300 on the first day and a
-portion of the second. Richardson at the pavilion
-and Lockwood at the gasometer end started the
-attack, and on the same magnificent wicket <i>dismissed
-Yorkshire for 78!</i> Of these, Jack Brown made 48!
-Those of us who were playing, and those who were
-lucky enough to have visited the Oval that day,
-could never in their lives have seen finer fast bowling.
-Both bowled at a tremendous pace, both bowled at
-the top of their form; they seemed almost to be
-bowling man against man, to be vying for supremacy.
-It was a great day to catch the finest natural fast
-bowler in conjunction with the finest cultivated fast<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span>
-bowler making sad havoc of a very powerful side.
-It was in the second innings of Yorkshire that poor
-Frank Milligan made his last appearance at the Oval,
-and right well he played, making 64 out of a total of
-170 odd. (I should have mentioned before that
-F. S. Jackson was unfortunately incapacitated from
-batting through an injured thumb. This of course
-greatly weakened the Yorkshire batting, but at the
-time Lord Hawke said he had rarely seen finer
-bowling.)</p>
-
-<p>Of Arthur Mold this can be said with absolute
-certainty, that no bowler ever attained a similar
-pace with such a minimum of exertion&mdash;two or three
-long loose strides, two at a trot, and an arm swinging
-round like a flail, a good length, great pace,
-and on any wicket at times a considerable flick back
-from the off&mdash;a bowler that, like Richardson or
-Lockwood, might bowl a man at any period of his
-innings, however well set he might be. For as many
-of us know, there are certain bowlers, generally of the
-slow or medium class, that a respectable batsman,
-after an hour or so’s stay at the wicket, can negotiate
-with safety, unless of course some violent risk be
-taken. With these three, and perhaps one or two
-more, it is quite possible to be bowled neck and
-heels when taking no risk whatever.</p>
-
-<p>Of all the other fast bowlers I have met, the
-majority, and it is a large majority too, either go
-with the arm or go up the pitch straight as a die.
-Wass and Barnes are exceptions to this general rule,
-for under favourable conditions they bowl with a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span>
-distinct leg break, and very difficult to play
-they are.</p>
-
-<p>George Hirst, I think, stands in a section of fast
-bowlers entirely his own. It is a curious thing that
-we possess so few really fast left-handers. Hirst is
-equipped not only with great pace, but also with an
-extraordinary swerve, that is to say, he does not
-always have it under his immediate control, but
-when starting fresh and with a new ball, he swirls
-inwards in a stump-uprooting manner, and the
-swerve seems to take place in the last two or three
-yards of the ball’s flight. I remember seeing Captain
-Bush confront him last year at Leeds for the first
-time. Hirst came up to the wicket with his swinging
-run, the ball left his hand; Bush’s left leg shot out
-for his slashing stroke by cover, and it was only by
-astonishing luck that at the very last moment he
-stopped a yorker almost behind his right foot, and
-in stopping it overbalanced and lay prone&mdash;thus
-emphasising the luck he had experienced and the
-amount of the swerve. With a new ball it usually
-stays with him from twenty minutes to an hour, and
-it can occur again after a sufficient rest and the
-acquisition of another new ball. I think I am doing
-Rhodes no injustice when I say that for some time
-now Hirst has dismissed, largely through this swerve
-of his, more of the first five or six batsmen than
-have fallen to his, Wilfred’s, lot.</p>
-
-<p>Of all the really fast amateur bowlers none have
-given me so much pleasure to watch as Sam Woods.
-At Brighton College they tell me he was quite as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span>
-fast as he ever was afterwards all through his first-class
-career as a bowler. Personally I experienced
-the same luck as many another would-be run-getter
-who met him for the first time, that is to say, I went
-in to bat and came out again without having heard
-the sound of the bat striking the ball, b. Woods 0!
-The pace was bewildering. At his best and in full
-health he was as fast as an ordinary player cares to
-encounter. Exceedingly even in temper for a fast
-bowler, there were only one or two little things that
-really worried him. One, however, was to see a man
-draw away as he came up to the crease with those
-short shuffling strides he always adopted. I shall
-never forget one day at Fenner’s in some trial match
-a rather nervous performer against fast bowling
-wobbled to the wicket. Sam was bowling <i>over</i> the
-wicket, and the newcomer, who practically relied on
-a very late cut for scoring purposes, promptly planted
-him for two or three fours through the slips, having
-first withdrawn, at the approach of “the Terror,” in
-the direction of the square leg umpire. The same
-sliding motion at right angles to the wicket, the
-same stroke, the same lucky four, and Sam goes
-round the wicket. If fast at first, he is faster now,
-and the nervous player is still more nervous. The
-ball comes down well clear of the leg stick, and is
-cut <i>behind the wicket and between the wicket and the
-stumper!</i>&mdash;a truly miraculous stroke, and one that I
-have never seen executed save on this solitary
-occasion. Four! but the next was straight, and it
-crept a bit, and the nervous batsman retired, having,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span>
-however, before his departure credited himself with
-fifty or so on the sunburnt “tins.”</p>
-
-<p>Of W. M. Bradley, there is nothing to be said&mdash;a
-natural fast bowler with the mind of a man and
-the strength of a bull. I faced him two years ago at
-Canterbury. He was bowling against the pavilion
-and against the sun; the slope of the ground went
-with him, a new ball was in his hand, and it whizzed
-down the pitch as it left it. It was about the most
-uncomfortable ten minutes I ever spent. They came
-“down the vale” with a four-inch off break; they
-grazed one’s ribs, one’s chest, one’s nose; and at last
-I was caught in the slips protecting my eye with my
-hand. It was on this occasion that I was truly
-convinced of what a grand player Tom Hayward is
-against really fast bowling. Though we were easily
-beaten, he made 97 not out! Good boy!</p>
-
-<p>There are many more in this our third class that
-I should like to write about, but space and the clock
-forbid, and so perforce am I compelled to halt
-awhile and wait for the little cavalcade of “lobsters”
-that are so far behind, so very far behind, the pressing
-throng of modern bowlers. To quote from
-<i>Wisden</i>:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p class="pbq p1">We, the solitary few who still strive to hold upright
-the tottering pillars in the ruined temple of lob bowling,
-unto whose shrine the bowlers of the olden time for ever
-flocked, to-day we are but of small account; there is
-scarcely a ground in England where derision is not our lot,
-or where laughter and jaunting jeers are not hurled broadcast
-at us. To-day perhaps to an all-powerful side we are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span>
-of little use&mdash;to a side that is weak, to a side whose special
-weakness is its fielding, we are the strychnine of tonics. By
-himself stands Simpson-Hayward, for he “flicks” the ball as
-we have all seen many a wrathful billiard-player do when
-returning the white from a most unexpected pocket&mdash;it spins
-and spins and breaks sharply from the off, and it sometimes
-hits the wicket. There are two more, Wynyard and myself,
-and we both bowl in the old, old way, and we bowl with
-a persistence born of tentative success&mdash;occasionally we hook
-a fish, and great is our rejoicing. We are both fond of this
-bowling, I particularly so, and when on many a ground
-throughout the country there has arisen on every side the
-gentle sound of “Take him orf! Take him orf!” were
-it not that the side ever comes before oneself, I would bowl,
-and bowl, and bowl, until at eventide the cows come home.&mdash;</p>
-
-<p class="pr4">D. L. A. J., <i>Wisden</i>, 1902.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-184.jpg" width="400" height="213" id="i117"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc17" summary="c17">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>C. J. Basébe.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>KENNINGTON OVAL IN 1849.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-185.jpg" width="400" height="292"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER V</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">FIELDING</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">S. L. Jessop</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">It</span> has become almost an axiom of the game that
-more matches are lost by bad fielding than through
-any superexcellence of batting or bowling, and that
-this is really the case few will deny.</p>
-
-<p>How many of those favoured mortals who participate
-in first-class cricket can call to mind instances
-of brilliant batting, followed up by capital bowling, all
-to be rendered null and void by the missing of a
-“sitter” by some lazy fieldsman whose thoughts
-were anywhere but on the game. Cricketers are but
-mortals, and catches will be missed as long as the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span>
-game of cricket is played, but less mistakes would be
-made, especially in the slips, if fieldsmen would but
-pay the strictest attention to the game, and not allow
-their thoughts to wander. That chance that “Cain”
-gave to third slip, which might have turned defeat
-into victory, would in all probability have been accepted,
-had the culprit’s thoughts not been too much engrossed
-in the choice of theatres that evening for his fiancée;
-and to such causes as these, if one could but read
-the thoughts of those at fault, many of the too
-frequent mistakes could be traced. Too much
-emphasis cannot be attached to this lack of attention,
-for one can but judge from one’s own experience.</p>
-
-<p>That fielding, the most important branch of the
-game, has deteriorated during even the past five or six
-years may be accepted as a true bill, and we can only
-look for improvement to those who have the rising
-generation under their charge. No one can expect to
-become a good fieldsman without assiduous and often
-irksome practice, and this, combined with the undue
-prominence bestowed on batting, may account somewhat
-for the deterioration. A batsman, by scoring
-50 runs, feels that he may have had a material hand
-in the success of his side, and in the same way so does
-a bowler who takes five or six wickets, for they both
-have something tangible to show in the score-sheet.
-True, the fieldsman may have helped the bowler by a
-brilliant catch or two, but there is no record of the
-amount of runs he may have saved. Thus it is that
-a little selfishness may crop up, for whereas the fieldsman
-may feel that, like the spoke of a wheel, he is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span>
-only part of a whole, the batsman or bowler feels
-that he is an individual. Be the reason what it may,
-there is no doubt that the practice of fielding is much
-neglected, and as there is not that monotony in it
-that so frequently crops up in batting achievements,
-it is difficult to understand the cause of that neglect.
-When one considers that the best batsman in the
-world is not absolutely certain of scoring a run, and
-that a good fieldsman nearly always saves 20 or 30,
-the importance of fielding can at once be appreciated.</p>
-
-<p>From a spectacular point of view there is no more
-stirring sight than to see eleven players, each of whom
-is striving his utmost to outdo the other in his efforts to
-save runs, bringing off catches that an ordinary field
-would not even attempt, and saving runs in a manner
-which at times borders on the miraculous. It is such
-a sight as this that saves cricket from becoming too
-monotonous. As has been mentioned before, sufficient
-practice is not indulged in; players who take
-great pains to improve their batting look upon fielding
-in the light of a “something” that has to be put
-up with, and as such only to be tolerated. Let these
-same players take half an hour’s practice every day
-for a month, and they will find an improvement in
-their fielding such as they would have hardly deemed
-possible. The only feasible way of obtaining practice
-is for some one to hit the ball to you from all sorts of
-distances, varying from 10 yards to 70, as this range
-will include different kinds of chances, from “slip”
-catches to catches in the long field. It is a good plan
-to use a light bat and hold it in the same manner that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span>
-one would grasp a racquet, as by doing so one is able to
-impart a “cut” to the ball which closely resembles the
-spin that would result from a mis-hit to “cover” or
-a “snick” in the “slips.” Excepting at school, throwing
-at the wicket is seldom practised, which is a great
-mistake, for many a run has been saved and many a
-wicket taken by the accuracy of a smart return.</p>
-
-<p>In classifying fieldsmen, one can roughly do so by
-saying that there are two kinds, those that field near
-the wicket and those that field in the out-field, and
-these latter are in the minority. In the same manner,
-fielding may be dissolved into two parts, namely,
-ground fielding and catching. Ground fielding has
-been brought to a state of perfection for which the
-improvement in the modern cricket-grounds is in a
-large manner responsible. To become a good ground
-fieldsman one must be able to judge the pace of the
-ball to a nicety; otherwise, although one may succeed
-in stopping it, one will fail to gather the ball accurately,
-and consequently will not save the run. The
-fieldsman who excels is the one who, gathering the
-ball accurately, returns it to the keeper or bowler with
-one and the same action. The time saved by this
-almost simultaneous action of stopping and returning
-the ball is of immense value to fielders in the long
-field, not only in the saving of singles, but also
-in the running out of unwary batsmen. When
-a ball is travelling along the ground, the first
-duty of a fieldsman is if possible to get in front
-of it, drawing the legs close together, so that, should
-the ball through any irregularity in the turf bump<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span>
-over the outstretched hands, it will be impeded
-by the fieldsman’s body. He must be equally
-certain with right or left hand in stopping those hits
-that he cannot get to with both hands, and there may
-be a time when it is absolutely necessary to use his
-foot in order to save runs. This method, useful and
-indispensable though it may be at times, is, one is
-sorry to say, becoming a little too general. Whenever
-possible the hand should always be used, and
-only as a desperate last chance should the foot be
-resorted to.</p>
-
-<p>On the perfect grounds that now abound, in nine
-cases out of ten the chance of overtaking a ball that
-has been only moderately hit is very small, but it is
-worth while to pursue, even with the odds so great
-against one. And one should bear in mind that the
-quicker one starts in that pursuit, the more likely is
-that boundary to be saved, especially as to gauge the
-decrease in the pace of the ball is a most difficult
-matter. Grounds too must be taken into consideration,
-for it does not follow that a boundary which
-one might save at Birmingham would be saved
-at Brighton. When you are attempting to save a
-boundary by <i>pursuing</i> the ball, never try to seize
-the ball too soon, for you are only more likely to
-miss it altogether, and your chase to be rendered
-futile. Even should you succeed in grasping the ball,
-your effort of stooping down and diving forward
-so upsets your balance that to turn round and return
-the ball without unnecessary loss of time is extremely
-difficult. The method that should be adopted, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span>
-one that is more likely to meet with success, is for
-the fieldsman to overtake the ball, and when a little
-in front, or even level with it, to stretch the hand
-out and allow it to roll into the hand.</p>
-
-<p>No matter how accurate one may be in returning
-a ball, accuracy is of little avail unless it be tempered
-with speed, for even though occasionally a man may
-be given out when the wicket has been hit and he has
-regained his ground, yet the fieldsman will find that
-it is the exception and not the rule. Without speed
-of return the fieldsman, be he ever so certain a catch
-or brilliant a ground field, will never reach a high
-point of excellence; he will be useful, but not great.
-Even this useful field is not so frequent as he should be.</p>
-
-<p>Opportunities of running men out are often lost
-by the fieldsman becoming flurried, and returning
-the ball in a haphazard manner to whichever end he
-happens to be near. This is a most fatal mistake,
-and one that has been the cause of allowing many
-a batsman to proceed on his way safely when the
-reverse should have been the case. When an opportunity
-of running out a man does occur&mdash;and these,
-from the fieldsman’s point of view, are too few and
-far between&mdash;the fieldsman should determine as to
-which end he is to return the ball before it reaches
-him. He will then have more time to make certain of
-the accuracy of his aim. Should he be fielding near
-the wicket, he should return to the wicket-keeper at
-the height of the latter’s chest; if from the long
-field, on the first bounce, but always at the utmost
-speed. A time may come when it is imperative to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span>
-aim at the stumps, for the time occupied in the
-keeper breaking the wickets may just suffice to give
-the batsman the benefit of the doubt in a close race;
-but as a general rule it is one’s duty to rely on the
-keeper. The bowler at times has to fulfil the duties
-of a wicket-keeper in receiving the return balls, and
-as he does not possess the protection of gloves, one
-has to consider the question of damaging his fingers.
-With a bowler who is wont to flinch at a fast return,
-it is wiser in the end to leave the wicket entirely to
-the accuracy of the thrower and the nimbleness of
-the backer-up. Many “run outs” may accrue in
-this manner which might not have come to pass if
-too much reliance had been placed on the bowler.
-Preventing runs is made much easier by the faculty
-of being able to anticipate the direction of the batsman’s
-stroke before he has actually played the ball,
-and this capacity is only acquired by most careful
-attention and experience. By being on one’s toes,
-somewhat in the same manner as one would start for
-a race, it becomes much easier to cut off a ball than
-if one’s foot is placed flat on the ground. The
-adoption of this attitude not only saves actual runs,
-but it has the further advantage of preventing batsmen
-from attempting those short runs which so often
-have the effect of demoralising a weak fielding side.
-Difficult as it is at times to judge to which end the
-ball will be returned, especially when a fieldsman feints
-to throw in at one end and then suddenly returns
-it to the other, some one should always be backing
-up both the wicket-keeper and bowler. Nothing is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span>
-more annoying to the bowler than to see a sharp-run
-single converted into a two or even more by the lack
-of adequate backing-up. It is those who are fielding
-near the wicket who should be responsible for
-the prevention of overthrows, especially the man in
-that place to which it is usual to relegate a weak
-fieldsman, mid-on.</p>
-
-<p>There is no hard-and-fast rule for the proper
-position to hold the hands when about to receive a
-catch. The hand should be so held as to form a cup,
-with the fingers extended, and the moment the ball
-is inside, the hand should be allowed to give, in order
-to minimise the impact. For catches in the long
-field one should thrust the hands up as high as one
-can, so that, if the ball should be fumbled, a chance
-may be left of securing it on a second attempt. One-handed
-catches must be made at times, even in the
-long field, but whenever possible two hands should
-be used. Confidence is a great factor of success at
-cricket, but even that quality may be overdone,
-especially in catching. To make a comparatively
-easy catch look difficult, in order to extort applause
-from the crowd, is a most unsportsmanlike act,
-jeopardising as it does the success of a side in order
-to gain a few moments of self-glorification. Fortunate
-is the side which does not possess one of these
-mountebanks. Catches should be looked upon as
-timely gifts of Providence, and as such not to be
-lightly treated, for in these days of concrete-like
-wickets chances occur all too infrequently.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-193.jpg" width="400" height="236" id="i124"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>THE CRICKET FIELD AT RUGBY.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-194.jpg" width="400" height="219" id="i125"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc18" summary="c18">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>W. J. Bowden.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>A MATCH IN THE EIGHTIES.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In no branch of the game is the improvement so
-marked as it is in wicket-keeping, and for this improvement
-present-day cricketers have to thank that
-prince of wicket-keepers, the Australian, Blackham.
-Before he made his appearance in England, long-stops
-were looked upon as quite as indispensable to a side
-as the wicket-keeper himself, but on his arrival in
-1878 the fallacy of that theory was quickly demonstrated.
-Wickets in those days were not quite the
-perfect wickets of to-day, and with Spofforth bowling
-his fastest and best, the manner in which Blackham
-stood close up to the wicket, and without the aid of
-a long-stop, was looked upon as something approaching
-the marvellous. Magnificent keepers as we have
-had, since he revolutionised the art of wicket-keeping,
-he is still without an equal.</p>
-
-<p>No one, unless he possesses a natural aptitude for
-the position, is likely to achieve any considerable
-success, though it is a mistake to suppose that a
-wicket-keeper, like the poet, is born, not made.
-Much can be done by practice, and by studying the
-methods of the many brilliant keepers that abound
-to-day. Excepting the captain of the side, no man
-is more open to criticism than the wicket-keeper,
-and in nine cases out of ten this criticism tends in
-the direction of abuse. By those who have been
-unfortunate enough to have been persuaded to don
-the gloves, the difficulties of the position are duly
-appreciated, but unless one has done so, one is hardly
-able to judge the great assistance that a good keeper
-can render a bowler. Besides his duties of stumping,
-running out, and catching, he is often able to inform<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span>
-the bowler as to the weak spots in a batsman’s play,
-for from his very position he can more easily detect
-them. In the case of a good bowler and an equally
-competent stumper, it is a combination of two heads
-against one, the most valuable combination that a
-side can possess. The confidence that a good keeper
-inspires in a bowler is only equalled by the confidence
-that one would naturally possess in using one’s own
-billiard-cue. An incompetent wicket-keeper will
-make a good bowler powerless, whilst a good keeper
-considerably strengthens a weak bowling side. A
-wicket-keeper without a good nerve may be likened
-to a ship without a rudder, for each is practically helpless.
-The slightest sign of flinching would result in
-an appalling amount of byes and missed opportunities.
-Very rarely indeed is a match concluded without the
-wicket-keeper having played an important part in
-either the winning or the losing of it. He should
-never lose sight of the ball from the moment it is out
-of the bowler’s hand to the moment it reaches him,
-and above all, he should never snap at the ball. He
-stands up in a stooping posture, with his hands close
-enough to the bails to allow him to remove them in
-almost the same action as receiving the ball. Until
-the ball has been struck or has passed the bat, he
-should remain stationary, for it is much easier to
-accurately judge the ball thus than when on the
-move. Necessity compels him at times to jump to
-this or that side, but this should be done before the
-ball reaches him, in order to allow the body to be
-again stationary when his hands receive the ball. In<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span>
-order to run the least chance of injury to the hands,
-especially to the top joints of the fingers, the hands
-should be held at a downward angle, and allowed to
-“give” with the impact of the ball. This “give”
-should be very slight to slow or medium bowling, as
-the drawing back of the hands after taking a ball,
-even though occupying the slightest fraction of a
-second, often results in a missed opportunity of
-stumping. Wicket-keepers who are in the habit of
-allowing their hands to “give” considerably are, on
-account of their hands being farther back, invariably
-better catchers than stumpers. This is especially
-applicable to Board, the Gloucestershire keeper. He
-brings off some most wonderful catches, but from
-this very habit of drawing the hands back too far,
-he is often unable to outpace the batsman when a
-question of stumping arises. Considering how
-completely a batsman, especially a left-hander, often
-obscures the sight of the ball from the keeper’s view,
-it is a distinct credit to his skill that he is able to
-perform his duties so ably. How many times has
-the explanation of a dropped catch by cover or mid-off
-been put down to want of a proper sight of the
-ball; but one rarely hears that excuse from the
-stumper, and yet he, above any of the other fields,
-has a right to use it. To a very fast bowler even
-the most proficient of wicket-keepers should stand
-back, for he is more likely to make catches there
-than if he stood up. Stumping off fast bowling is of
-rare occurrence, not on account of the pace of the
-bowling, but because in playing it a batsman rarely<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span>
-leaves his crease, and consequently the keeper gets
-few opportunities. The latter’s most difficult duty
-is the taking of balls on the leg side. He rarely gets
-a clear sight of these, and consequently has to rely
-more or less on guess-work, especially to bowling
-above medium pace. The South African, Halliwell,
-was quite as much at home in keeping on the leg
-side as he was on the off, and frequently used to
-stump batsmen whilst attempting to glance fast bowling
-to leg. Thankless as the post of wicket-keeping
-is at times, yet from the frequency of his opportunities
-the wicket-keeper must often gain some
-solace.</p>
-
-<p>Because a fieldsman is a good out-field, it does
-not follow that he will be equally successful in any
-position nearer the wicket, so that, though it may be
-an excellent plan for a fieldsman to become acquainted
-with other positions in the field, yet, as “use is second
-habit,” it may be wiser for him to make a specialty
-of that position in which he has become accustomed
-to field. On account of the comparatively little movement
-that it requires, “point” is a much sought
-after position by those players who, either from stress
-of age or laziness, do not wish to indulge in much
-running or throwing. Such is really not the use for
-which this position was intended, for, from the very
-fact of its being so adjacent to the wicket, it requires
-extreme attention and activity. “Point” should
-never be farther away from the wicket than 12
-yards, either to slow bowling or fast, and he should
-always be ready to take the place of the stumper<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span>
-whenever the latter, either because of the bad return
-or on account of his zeal in running after a “snick,”
-leaves his post. Many “points” stand too far out,
-so much so that they encroach on the duties of
-“cover.” If a “point” stands some 16 or 17 yards
-away from the wicket, the “cover” must of necessity
-stand much deeper, and by doing so he can rarely
-stop two determined batsmen from stealing many
-short runs during the course of a long partnership.
-No finer “points” than Noble, and Wright of
-Derbyshire, who stand rarely more than 10 yards
-from the bat, could be found, and the number of
-catches that they have brought off because of their
-propinquity to the wicket more than counterbalances
-the number of runs that they might have saved by
-standing back.</p>
-
-<p>There is no position in the field that gives so
-many opportunities for a fine field to shine as does
-that of “cover-point.” It is a most trying position
-for any one who may not be in the best of condition,
-as he has to be continually on the move, for he it is
-that is held responsible for the prevention of short
-runs, quite the most arduous part of his many duties.
-As he has a large area of ground to look after, he must
-be very exact in keeping in his right place, as even
-a yard may mean all the difference between taking
-or missing a chance, especially as the ball sometimes
-travels at great speed in his direction. The difficulty
-of the position lies in the amount of “spin” that is
-often imparted to the ball, not only when on the
-ground, but also when in the air. Catches which often<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span>
-appear to be going to one’s right hand have suddenly
-to be attempted with the left, on account of the
-curve, and this curve being of a very sudden nature,
-these catches are extremely hard to judge. This
-curve is most pronounced when a slow left-hand or
-a leg-break bowler is bowling. One often sees
-apparently easy catches from mis-hits dropped at
-“cover” in a most unaccountable fashion, but in
-reality these simple “dolly” catches are much more
-difficult to hold than those from hard drives. An
-incredible amount of “spin” is put on a mis-hit ball,
-so that, unless the catch is received well into the
-middle of the hand, the spinning ball will act in much
-the same fashion as does a billiard-ball when “check
-side” is imparted to it. When assisted by an extra
-mid-off, “cover” should place himself much squarer
-with the wickets, as he will have a much less area of
-ground to guard, and he must be just deep enough
-to be able to save singles. He should be able to
-return the ball from below the shoulder with a fast
-wristy action, full pitch to the wickets. The
-introduction of extra mid-off has somewhat lessened
-“cover’s” duties, so much so that often a brilliant
-field has very little to do in that position, this being
-especially the case with slow bowling. Naturally,
-strokes off slow bowling are made more in front than
-behind or square, so that to this class of bowling the
-extra mid-off is indispensable. To see Gregory
-fielding at “cover” is an object-lesson to those
-fielders who may have fallen into the disastrous habit
-of allowing the ball to come to them, instead of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span>
-dashing in to meet it. There are many admirable
-cover-points, but for many years the Australian has
-been quite in a class by himself in that position.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p>
-
-<p>The duties of “third man” are of the same
-description as those of “cover,” for the position calls
-for equal activity and dash. Short runs are invariably
-attempted if the “third man” is at all likely
-to be flurried, so that the fieldsman selected for the
-position must essentially be cool and collected. The
-pace of the wicket and the bowling should determine
-the exact position in which he should stand, and he
-should cultivate a stooping attitude, as the balls come
-to him as a rule very low. He will not get many
-catches, but when he does, it is extremely likely that
-they will be very difficult, on account of the “cut”
-that the ball will possess from being hit in that
-direction. When a short run is attempted, it is
-better to return the ball to the bowler, as the
-batsman who is backing up has less ground to cover
-than the striker. Any ball that goes to the left hand
-of “point” he has to attend to, and he must also back
-up the wicket-keeper when the ball is returned from
-the on side. One of the long fields is generally
-deputed to fill the position, often solely in order to
-save him from having to walk too far in order to fill
-some other position. Naturally it is a wise precaution
-to avoid tiring your fieldsmen, but unless the long
-field shows a marked aptitude for the position, he
-should not be placed there. Third men that one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span>
-cannot occasionally steal runs from are very rare, but
-he would be a daring runner who would attempt to
-do so when such brilliant men as Trumper, Sewell, or
-Burnup are fielding in that position.</p>
-
-<p>If one could trace the position of the field in
-which most catches are missed, “the slips,” it would
-be safe to say, would pan out as the chief offenders.
-Excepting the wicket-keeper’s, theirs are the most
-important places, and require quick-sighted fieldsmen
-who are certain catches. Attention is the most
-important quality, combined with the faculty of being
-able to judge the flight of the ball from the bat.
-One must adopt a stooping attitude, in order to reach
-low catches, and also because it enables one to spring
-in any direction with more ease than if one stands
-upright. Though two hands, as in other positions in
-the field, should be used whenever possible, yet one
-must be certain with either hand, as the majority
-of catches are brought off with one hand. Two
-common faults are pretty general, namely, snapping
-at the ball instead of letting it come into the hand,
-and standing in the wrong place. The distance at
-which the slips should stand varies very much in
-accordance with the state of the pitch and the nature
-of the bowling. They would naturally be farther
-back to fast bowling than to slow. It is a moot
-point as to whether a slip should be stationary or
-occasionally on the move, in order to anticipate a
-stroke. An experienced slip has his own method, and
-he is wise to stick to it if he finds it meets with
-success, even though it be a method not altogether<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span>
-orthodox. Of present-day slips individually, R. E.
-Foster, A. O. Jones, Tunnicliffe, J. R. Mason, and
-Braund stand out very prominently, but collectively
-the combination of Braund, Maclaren, and Jones is all
-that one could desire.</p>
-
-<p>An easy position, but one that requires considerable
-nerve and activity, is “mid-off.” As a rule the
-ball comes straight to the fielder and at great pace,
-but usually with very little twist on, though
-occasionally, when a left-hander is bowling, the ball
-swerves a good deal. The most difficult catches that
-he has to deal with are those that rise from the very
-moment that the ball touches the bat, and unless he
-judges the ball very accurately, he will find that the
-tips of his fingers will suffer very considerably, and
-that success will not attend his efforts. “Mid-off”
-should be in such a position as to be able to back up
-the bowler when the batsman returns the ball hard,
-and also to save short runs. Like “cover” and
-“third man,” he should be always ready to start, as
-he often gets chances of a run-out. The amount of
-runs that the Australian Jones and Hirst save in that
-position, and the catches that they bring off, are
-phenomenal.</p>
-
-<p>In all the course of my experience I have never
-yet seen a really first-class “mid-on.” It may be that
-I have been peculiarly unfortunate in that respect.
-It is an easy position to field in, because the ball is
-not often hit in that direction, and when it is, there
-is no twist, although there may be a good deal of
-pace on it. On account of the easiness of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span>
-position, the weak fieldsmen are deposited there.
-When a “short leg” is utilised, “mid-on’s” duties
-are a perfect sinecure, but on fast wickets, when the
-short leg’s services are dispensed with, he has a
-considerable amount of work to get through. He
-is often the only man fielding on the on side of the
-wicket, and accordingly he has to run for any ball
-that may be played on that side. He must be ready
-to back up both the wicket-keeper and the bowler, so
-that a great many runs can be saved by a smart field
-in this position.</p>
-
-<p>On a bad wicket and with an off-break bowler the
-position of short leg is indispensable, as under these
-conditions many balls, though intended to be played
-straight, hit the edge of the bat and, on account of
-the break, proceed in his direction. Though weak
-fielders are also relegated to this position, it is a
-difficult post to fill adequately, as the ball comes often
-very quick and low, with a good deal of spin on.
-His position varies a good deal according to the style
-of the batsman, but he should not be too deep. As
-a general rule, he should be about 10 or 11 yards
-from the batsman. As so much leg-break bowling is
-now in vogue, he often gets bombarded in a dangerous
-manner. When a bowler of this kind is performing,
-it is just as well to place one of the best fieldsmen in
-that position.</p>
-
-<p>Fielding in the “long field” requires more nerve
-and judgment than does fielding near the wicket.
-The ball is much longer in the air and on the
-ground, and it is on account of this fact that nerve<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span>
-plays such an important part. The ball is so long in
-coming to the fieldsman that he has time to conceive
-all manner of things that may happen, and it is for
-this reason that the knowledge of the temperaments
-of those playing under him is so useful to the captain.
-A fieldsman who is nervous in the long field need not
-necessarily be classed as a bad field, for cases have
-come under my own observation of the wonderful
-change that has been wrought in a “nervy” field
-when fielding close to the wickets. Generally speaking,
-there are two positions in the long field, “long
-on” and “long off,” but now that the fashionable
-method of bowling wide of the leg stump has
-somewhat superseded the “off theory,” the old
-position of “long leg” has lately been made more
-use of. In all three positions the duties are similar,
-and they require a safe pair of hands, speed in
-running, and great accuracy in returning the ball.
-Everything in the nature of a chance must be
-attempted, even at the risk of not saving a boundary,
-for often catches are made that at times look
-impossible. “Long field” must return the ball the
-moment that it is in his hands, and should never wait
-for the ball to come to him, but should dash in the
-moment it is struck. Few “out-fields” can throw a
-distance of 70 or 80 yards without going through
-some such preliminary as moving the arms round
-and round in order to gain sufficient momentum
-to aid them in propelling the ball, and even running
-2 or 3 yards before returning it. This waste
-of time is simply a sign of lack of practice, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span>
-can easily be remedied by sufficient attention paid
-to it.</p>
-
-<p>The importance of good fielding cannot be too
-greatly emphasised, for without it a good bowling side
-is rendered ineffectual and powerless to win matches,
-excepting on bad wickets. Unless a batsman or a
-bowler should possess great proficiency, he should not
-be included in a first-class match if he cannot attain
-to an average standard of fielding; <i>i.e.</i> he should be
-able to throw, not jerk, and catch reasonable catches.
-The time comes when a fieldsman, through advancing
-years, may not be so speedy in the field as he was
-wont to be in his younger days, though his powers
-as a batsman may be scarcely diminished. Provided
-he is still able to hold catches, in positions that require
-little or no running about, he may still be a powerful
-factor of success to his side. But for young fieldsmen
-who either from sheer laziness or inability cannot
-either hold catches or save runs, one cannot but have
-a feeling of disgust, and it is such players as these
-that are out of place in first-class cricket.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-208.jpg" width="400" height="253" id="i137"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>KENT</i> v. <i>SUSSEX, AT BRIGHTON.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn"><i>A supposed Match played between 1839-41.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-209.jpg" width="400" height="238"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER VI</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">COUNTY CRICKET</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">W. J. Ford</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">It</span> has been always cast in the teeth of us Englishmen
-by our Continental critics that we take our amusements
-seriously&mdash;that our idea of recreation is to go forth
-and kill something, and that anything of the nature
-of excitement is unknown to us; even our wars seem
-to them to be conducted by us in a cold-blooded,
-business-like, almost saturnine fashion, such as the
-foreigner cannot understand. Our almost fanatical
-excitement over the relief of Mafeking and of Ladysmith
-might have served to disenlighten our neighbours
-to a certain degree, but they probably regarded
-those wild bursts of enthusiasm as a mere phase of
-a fever, as one of the periodic alternations of heat<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span>
-and cold that are characteristic of a severe attack of
-ague. It is for the historian and the student of
-human nature to decide whether our nature is phlegmatic
-or merely proud, and whether these rare outbursts
-are not in reality a genuine eruption of violent
-volcanic feelings which have long smouldered beneath
-the crust of our real nature. The true account seems
-to be that in matters of a public and, still more, of
-an international character, insular pride does not
-allow us to reveal the fact that the Englishman possesses
-a certain amount of that excitability which we
-choose to attribute to the southern and the Latin
-races: it is only a special stress that reveals this side
-of our nature. When, however, the Englishman’s
-foot is on English soil, and when his only critics are
-of the same blood as himself, then and only then does
-he allow the true keenness of his disposition to run
-riot. The Englishman, in short, only casts aside his
-phlegm, his reserve, and his pride when he is in
-congenial society, and the presence of the necessary
-society is in no place more apparent than on the
-scenes of those sports that afford him the amusement
-and, in some cases, the means of life. Those scenes
-may be narrowed down to the football field, the race-course,
-and the cricket ground. It is with the last
-of these that our business at present lies.</p>
-
-<p>It would be impossible to lay down any cast-iron
-reason for the fact that general interest in cricket has
-increased by leaps and bounds in the last twenty
-years. The fact is incontrovertible, whatever the
-cause may be, but to most of those who have watched<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span>
-the course of cricket events, the progress of county
-cricket will present itself as the primary cause of the
-progress of the game as a whole. At the same time,
-there is a fair field left for those who choose to maintain
-that the impetus given to county cricket is really
-due to the rapid spread of the game itself and the
-attendant enthusiasm of its admirers; while there is,
-as usual, a third course left to us, which is to maintain
-that the two things, general cricket and county
-cricket, have advanced <i>pari passu</i>, each owing much
-to the other. And at this point we may abandon
-the question as one that will produce abundant controversy
-and no conviction, especially as all the
-theorists can meet and agree as to the one common
-effect, differ as they may as to the cause, namely,
-that both players of the game and lovers of the
-game have increased by innumerable multiples during
-the last fifteen or twenty years. There are those
-who think it good to decry this desperate enthusiasm
-for a pastime&mdash;who declare that it is a symptom of
-national decadence, and declare that a mere game is
-an irrational thing, inasmuch as a rational treatment
-of it at once destroys its existence as a game in the
-true sense of the word. We are hardly prepared,
-however, to have our pastimes handled in this Socratic
-manner. A game is a game, and if it is a good game,
-we who love it consider that it deserves something
-more than casual and ephemeral treatment; hence we
-throw ourselves into it heart and soul, and those who
-like to see heart-and-soul work have only to go to
-the nearest county ground on a match day to see how<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span>
-energy and rivalry can, on the principle enunciated
-above, turn a game into a no-game.</p>
-
-<p>Nor is it illogical at this point to assume that
-county cricket is to us the highest popular embodiment
-of our pastime; it is true that a certain and a limited
-number of special matches attract more attention, for
-sentimental reasons, than do mere county matches,
-but it is on the latter class of games that genuine and
-general interest is mainly expended, earning for those
-who exhibit it a certain amount of contempt from
-those who hold that to lavish interest on a game is
-to squander a valuable asset. Political economy and
-its votaries would doubtless tell us&mdash;indeed, they do
-tell us&mdash;that such labour as is expended on hitting, or
-on bowling, or on stopping, or on catching a mere
-ball, is unproductive labour, and consequently labour
-lost, while they show no limit to their contempt for
-those who, not being actual players themselves,
-squander&mdash;so they call it&mdash;valuable time in watching
-other people waste time that is equally valuable.
-However, the cynic and his butt, like the poor, are
-always with us; all that we can desire and all that
-we can hope for is that he will confine himself to his
-dwelling, and leave us to enjoy ourselves in peace,
-while we may fairly ask him to reflect in the recesses
-of his barrel as to what the watchers of cricket would
-do with themselves if there were no cricket to watch.
-That they would be better employed is possible;
-that they would be worse employed is probable; and
-he would be a poor philosopher indeed who would
-find fault with the open-air stage of Lord’s or the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span>
-Oval, and would yet allow the music-hall and the
-theatre to stifle their nightly victims. The strictest
-of Puritans could hardly find fault with bat and ball
-as being the inculcators of evil principles; rather, like
-the study of the ingenuous arts, do they “soften our
-characters and forbid them to be savage.” The cynic
-and the rhymer have had their say, but cricket is
-still with us, and seems likely to stay, howl as they
-will.</p>
-
-<p>In connection with the game’s advance, it would be
-unjust not to acknowledge the fillip that has been
-given to it by the periodical visits of Australian
-elevens, the first of which occurred as far back as
-1878, combined with the return of their calls by our
-men. It was a new truth to us that there was growing
-up in Greater Britain a race of men who, taught by
-ourselves, profiting by our lessons, and in the process
-of time perhaps improving on our methods, were
-able to withstand us to our face, the pupil often
-proving the superior of the master; and it may be
-that to this fact, and the perhaps unconscious conviction
-that “the old man” must not be “beaten by
-the boy” at cricket as at chess, is due the uprise of
-county cricket as the readiest means of ascertaining
-our strength and organising our resources, though it
-was not till several years after the first visit of
-Australians that any real attempt to organise county
-cricket into a formal competition succeeded. Such
-an attempt had been made in 1872 by the Marylebone
-Cricket Club, which offered a cup in that year
-for competition among the counties, but the offer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span>
-was coldly received, the counties that entered were
-so few that such words as “competition” and
-“championship” became misnomers, and the offer
-was withdrawn. Not that the word “champion” had
-not been and still was applied to some county or
-another as soon as the last ball of the season had been
-bowled, but the expression was visionary; it was
-merely the outcome of the views of the press or of
-individuals, and it naturally happened that when
-these views conflicted there were “two Richmonds in
-the field,” both styled champion by their respective
-supporters. It was not till the representatives of
-counties met in peaceful conclave, coded laws and
-bye-laws, with the request that the M.C.C. would
-exercise a fatherly and presidential rule over county
-cricket, that the latter became historical fact.</p>
-
-<p>It seems to me that the growth and systematization
-of general cricket are due to the growth and systematization
-of county cricket, and the emulation which
-accompanied its increase. The counties, having set
-their hands to the plough, were in no mood to look
-back; those which, as exceptionally strong, were
-rated first-rate, set themselves to see that no weakness
-on their part should cause them to be degraded
-to the ranks; while the rank and file, on the other
-hand, spared no effort to secure their own promotion.
-And at this point it is well to remind those
-who profess to see a mere desire of money-making
-underlying the expansion of county cricket, that the
-then junior counties, many of which are now seniors,
-owed their existence and its prolongation not to gate-money<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span>
-or speculating syndicates, as is the case with
-many football clubs, but to the generous assistance
-of enthusiastic patrons, whose only motive for liberality
-was their own love of the game, as a game,
-and their desire to see it not merely extended, but
-perfected. At the present day there are county clubs
-which rely mainly for their existence on the voluntary
-subscriptions and donations of their supporters, men
-whose only reward is the opportunity of seeing good
-cricket brought home to their own doors, and the
-promotion, expansion, and improvement of the game.
-Gate-money is of course an important factor in a
-club’s receipts, but it is sheer nonsense, it is almost
-mendacity, to declare that the county cricket of to-day
-is played for gate-money and for nothing else.
-Yet such assertions have been made, and are still
-made, by men who do not reflect that the patrons
-who subscribe to a club do not do so with the idea
-of providing the public with a gratis entertainment,
-though&mdash;I am thinking of one patron in particular&mdash;such
-an act would not be without precedent: their
-idea is, as stated before, to provide amusement for
-themselves, encourage the game, and help those who
-help themselves. The last people to grumble at the
-payment of gate-money are the payers themselves,
-who are not slow to recognise that sixpence is not a
-large sum to expend for a day in the open air, with a
-display of skill and activity thrown in, for which the
-spectator pays at the rate of about one penny per
-hour! Lastly, and briefly&mdash;for there is no satisfaction
-gained by dealing with misstatements&mdash;when<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span>
-accounts are balanced, the surplus that remains, if any,
-does not go to swell the speculator’s income, but is
-devoted to the improvement of accommodation, the
-advancement of the game, or that prudent economy
-that provides against the cricketer’s bugbear, in every
-sense of the word&mdash;a rainy day.</p>
-
-<p>I have suggested that we owe the increase of
-cricket to the growth of county cricket, and the
-reasons are not far to seek. When once a county is
-included in the first class, or aspires to it, its first effort
-is to enlist all its available talent, and as the reward
-of the great cricketer is no mean one, whether that
-reward come in the shape of reputation and amusement
-to the amateur, or of good red gold to the
-professional, the aim and ambition of every promising
-player and of the club to which he belongs is to get
-at least a fair trial in the higher spheres of the game.
-Further than that, the executive does not merely wait
-to receive the applications of the ambitious, but, like
-Porsena of Clusium, it “bids its messengers ride forth,
-east and west and south and north,” not exactly
-“to summon its array,” but to ascertain what fighting
-blood there is in the county ready for immediate
-action, and what recruits there are whose early
-promise may be developed into disciplined effectiveness.
-In other words, the cricketing pulse of the
-county at once begins to throb, and the executive,
-like a wise physician, keeps its finger on that organ,
-to ascertain the condition of the patient. But it is
-not merely by inquisition into the talent that is
-available that the ranks of a county eleven are filled<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span>
-up: the promising players are invited to attend at
-the county ground for inspection, practice, and tuition,
-being drafted into the company of the “ground”
-bowlers, and given opportunities in minor matches
-of exhibiting their natural and their trained powers,
-a further impulse being given to cricket by the
-distribution of the big matches among different
-centres, where such distribution is possible, and by
-the mission of so-called second elevens to the most
-distant bounds, to play matches and to discover
-talent. These trips may well be compared to the
-marches of different regiments through those districts
-from which, under the territorial system, they hope to
-draw their recruits. When to these different forms
-of encouragement we add the sums spent in occasional
-subsidies, to say nothing of the salaries of players
-and officials, and of the expenses entailed by the upkeep
-of the club’s ground and property, it will be
-seen that, though the sour may sneer, it would be
-and is impossible for a crack county to maintain its
-position unless its assured income from subscriptions
-were augmented by the humble sixpence of gate-money.
-It is not, of course, every county that can
-manage its cricket <i>en prince</i> in the way indicated:
-that implies a heavy rent-roll, a handsome and
-dependable income, and perhaps a snug little sum in
-the 2-3/4 per cents; only rich counties can do things
-with a lavish hand, and find themselves able to spare
-a lucrative match that will produce a bouncing
-benefit for some deserving professional. Others have
-to look rather wistfully at the small roll of cloth from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span>
-which their coat has to be cut, and have to curtail
-expenses accordingly; but the county cricket club,
-even if run upon humble lines, recollects that Rome
-was not completed within the twenty-four hours, and
-that as nothing succeeds like success, its first and
-primary duty is to be successful, if possible; that it
-is only by pains and patience that the best men are to
-be discovered and utilised, and that its turn can only
-be served by inoculating as many people and clubs
-as possible with the most virulent type of cricket
-fever.</p>
-
-<p>I am disposed to think that that county is likely
-to prosper which can find two or three grounds within
-its borders which are suitable for county cricket,
-and are in the centre of fairly populous districts; to
-which fact I attribute, in no small degree, the success
-of the Yorkshire County C.C. as an institution, and
-of its eleven as a fighting body. Not that the side
-has always had the pleasant experiences of 1900, 1901,
-and 1902, when in a series of eighty-three matches
-only two resulted in failure, for as recently as 1889
-the big county and Sussex met at the fag-end of the
-season in an encounter which was to decide whether
-the northern or the southern county was to find its
-name at the bottom of the roll; but the county of so
-many acres has not only a large field of selection, but
-has also, in Sheffield, Leeds, Huddersfield, Bradford,
-Scarborough, York, Hull, and Dewsbury, so many
-centres of action that she can display her powers to
-tens of thousands, where other counties can only
-muster thousands, and can thus command a very<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span>
-large and consistent income. But in strict and
-strong relief stands out the figure of Nottingham, a
-county that, to the best of my knowledge, has never
-played a “home” match away from the Trent Bridge
-ground, and has never been blest with a superabundance
-of this world’s goods, yet has for many
-years not only possessed a formidable eleven of its
-own, but has also been able to send out a full and
-steady stream of professional players of all classes,
-some of whom, though not exactly thankless children,
-have proved a veritable set of serpent’s teeth when
-arrayed against the mother county. Nottinghamshire
-is a standing exception to the rule that great elevens
-are the outcome of great incomes.</p>
-
-<p>There is no doubt that the true nucleus of a
-county eleven lies in the body of professional players
-that the executive has at its disposal. As men who
-are in receipt of a definite wage for their services, and
-as men who, by reason of their skill, obedience, and
-civility, have something like a right to expect a
-benefit match after some ten or twelve years of
-service, they find it a duty as well as a pleasure to
-keep themselves in good condition as well as in good
-practice, and, their services being always available,
-they are in the long run of more general use than
-the amateurs, many of whom, having other avocations,
-are unable to play regularly. Not that any
-eleven is complete without its amateurs. Among professionals
-a certain amount of professional jealousy
-is sure to arise, which sometimes grows into something
-stronger; while it has been proved by actual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span>
-experience that in an eleven entirely composed
-of paid players, and of course captained by a professional,
-difficulties of discipline will occur, the
-management of the eleven being acridly criticised
-by those who think that in some form or other their
-abilities have not been duly recognised, which lack
-of recognition is attributable to the worst and meanest
-of motives. There is no such thing, fortunately,
-as a cricket trade-union, nor is there any place for
-it, but as a matter of history it is right to record that
-various secessions, almost amounting to mutinies,
-have occurred in the professional ranks at different
-times, which have sometimes taken the form of a
-strike, based either on a claim for higher pay, or on
-a demand that certain players who are regarded as
-obnoxious&mdash;almost as blacklegs&mdash;by their comrades
-should not take part in a given match, under no less
-a penalty than the refusal of the protestants to appear
-themselves. All these things have occurred, but just
-as the intestine disputes of bees may, according to
-Virgil, be allayed by the flinging down of a handful
-of dust, so a little diplomatic negotiation has settled
-the dispute. But nothing tends so much to bind a
-team together in the bonds of amity as well as of
-discipline as the presence of capable amateurs&mdash;men
-of tact and education as well as efficient cricketers,
-one of whom, acting as captain and supreme controller,
-can readily check the earlier symptoms of
-discontent, or, better still, by his wise administration
-of his office prevent the incubation of a disease so
-disastrous as indiscipline. The moral effect of the
-presence of amateurs is no whit less than their value
-as players, preventing as it does the somewhat sordid
-troubles that are apt to arise among those to whom
-cricket is a livelihood, and not merely a pastime.
-Further, a great deal has been said and written&mdash;mainly
-by those who know nothing of the subject&mdash;as
-to the exact relations existing between the amateur
-and the professional. Only ignorance permits a man
-to apply such a word as “snobbish” to the custom
-of providing separate accommodation for the two
-classes of players; worse is it when such a one hints
-at such a thing as stand-offishness on the part of the
-amateurs. There are certain differences in the education
-and the social position of the two classes that
-makes the closer intimacy of the pavilion undesirable,
-and undesired also by both parties. At any rate,
-cricketers are perfectly capable of making all such
-arrangements for themselves, without the intrusion
-and interference of others. They have their own
-code and their own method, nor does there exist any
-analogy between the regulations, especially as to the
-amateur <i>status</i>, of cricket and of other games. Cricket
-stands on its own pedestal, and it is good that it
-should.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-221.jpg" width="400" height="179" id="i148"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A CRICKET MATCH (about 1750).</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>One of the troublous parts of cricket legislation
-has been the question of the residential qualification of
-cricketers for their counties, and the manner of defining
-what <i>bona fide</i> residence is. It has been always
-recognised, I believe, that a man may play for the
-county in which he was born, or for the county in
-which he resides, though for “or” might have been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span>
-written “and” as recently as 1873. Up to that date
-a man might, and many men did, play for two
-counties in one and the same season, under the two
-qualifications, while it was an understood thing that
-when those two counties met he represented the
-county of his birth. There were, however, obvious
-objections to this dual license, though they only first
-took shape in the form of proposed regulation in
-1868. Five years later it was made law that a man
-who was doubly qualified must elect at the beginning
-of each season to play for one of these counties, and
-for no other. It was undoubtedly an abuse that such
-a state of things should exist, but it must have been
-a convenient source of revenue to a few professionals
-in the days when fees were low and matches few.
-But the accurate definition of <i>bona fide</i> residence is
-still a difficulty: in some cases a man has taken a
-room, or a room has been taken for him, in the
-county for which he is desired to qualify, and he has,
-as occasion suited, occupied it for a night or two,
-while similar evasions or elastic interpretations of the
-law have existed; but the present solution of the
-question is probably the best one, <i>i.e.</i> to fall back on
-the patient and ever-willing committee of the M.C.C.,
-which consents to adjudicate on all such questions
-as they arise. It should be added that proposals have
-been made several times, notably by Lord Harris
-in 1880, that the residential period should be reduced
-to one year; but though this reduction would
-have acted well in certain cases, especially in those of
-Colonial and army players who took up their residence<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span>
-in England, it has been held that objections outweigh
-the advantages, and the tale of years has not been
-reduced.</p>
-
-<p>Some men consider that only the qualification of
-birth should be considered, so that only natives of a
-county should represent it; but, after all, this qualification
-is a mere accident as far as the individual himself
-is concerned; it would act hardly on a man born in
-a poor county&mdash;poor, that is, as a cricket-playing
-county; it would condemn many a first-class player
-to take little or no part in first-class cricket, which is
-the same thing as county cricket, and we might even
-have the anomaly of a county desiring, owing to its
-plethora of great players, to put two teams into the
-competition. As long as one county does not attempt
-to lure away men from its neighbours, as long
-as every club keeps its eyes wide open in its quest for
-its own young blood, and as long as every man feels
-that it is a primary duty to keep his allegiance to his
-native county, so long will the present rule be
-thoroughly satisfactory, and the “sporting spirit”
-must be trusted to see that the unwritten laws are
-not transgressed. At the same time, a hard case may
-readily be stated, the case of the man of true and
-tried merit, who has only the prospect of a small
-income and a small benefit as the reward his birth-county
-can give him, while by naturalising himself
-with its neighbour he may look for a large pecuniary
-reward. As a general rule, however, the present
-system works well: useful men are sometimes overlooked,
-and allowed, so to speak, to take foreign<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span>
-service as soldiers of fortune, but as the process is
-largely reciprocal, it reacts, to some extent, on all
-counties alike. To Yorkshire, and I believe to
-Yorkshire alone, belongs the credit of having been
-represented for many years by Yorkshiremen alone;
-but then Yorkshire is a very big land.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-227.jpg" width="400" height="581" id="i152"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A CURIOUS COUNTY CLUB ADVERTISEMENT.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-228.jpg" width="400" height="295" id="i153"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>As soon as cricket became a part and parcel of
-English sporting life, the contesting sides naturally
-ranged themselves, in some cases at least, under the
-political subdivisions of England, viz. the counties,
-and consequently we find county cricket existing in a
-form as far back as 1730, when “a great match was
-played on Richmond Green, between Surrey and
-Middlesex, which was won by the former” (I quote
-from T. Waghorn’s <i>Cricket Scores</i>). It is interesting,
-by the way, to note that two of the keenest rivals of
-to-day met in friendly combat some 130 years before
-Middlesex could boast of a county club, while the
-Surrey Club did not really come into existence till
-1845. It may be added that Middlesex had its
-revenge three years later, <i>i.e.</i> in 1733, and that the
-then Prince of Wales, a great patron of cricket, was
-so pleased with the skill and zeal of the players, that
-he presented them with a guinea apiece. Organisation,
-classification, championships, and all the paraphernalia
-of modern county cricket did not exist, of
-course, in the times when locomotion was difficult and
-matches consequently few, except among near neighbours;
-but it may not, on the whole, have been bad
-for cricket that at the outset many matches were made
-for money, and that all contests of importance were
-vehicles for universal and heavy betting. It may
-seem heterodox to approve of wagers and stakes,
-when nowadays it is the pride of those interested
-in cricket that it rises above such things, but it must
-not be forgotten that customs change with the times;
-that betting was universal in the eighteenth century
-and the early part of the nineteenth among all men
-who wished to be considered “smart”; and also that,
-but for the support and encouragement given to the
-game by “sportsmen” and “Corinthians,” it would
-never have flourished in the fashion in which it
-flourishes to-day: indeed, there was nothing more
-absurd in Kent playing Hampshire for 500 guineas,
-than that the representatives of the two counties should
-fight a main of cocks for the same sum. We naturally
-find certain abuses which are due to the betting
-system, but on the whole, it kept the game alive,
-and soon quickened it into a more vigorous existence.
-Money had to be found somehow; gate-money was
-out of the question in the days when most matches,
-even the very greatest, were played on village greens
-or open commons; hence the natural sequence that
-in the men who found the stakes and laid the wagers
-cricket found its best and keenest patrons. To the
-love of betting we may probably attribute the formation
-of various matches in which curious combinations
-of numbers were made, or when certain men were
-played as “given” men, so that the strength of the
-contending parties might be equalised. Who, however,
-would care to go nowadays to see twenty-two
-of Surrey play twenty-two of Middlesex, a game<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span>
-that took place in 1802, and again in 1803? In
-1797 we find that England played against <i>thirty-three</i>
-of Norfolk, and won in a single innings by 14
-runs. Again, in 1800, twelve of England play nineteen
-of Kent, and we find about this period such
-matches as “Middlesex, with two of Berkshire and
-one of Kent <i>v.</i> Essex, with two ‘given’ men”; but
-a special interest attaches to this match, as being the
-first ever played on Lord’s ground, the old “Lord’s”
-of Dorset Square, in 1787. Perhaps it is not unfair to
-conjecture that the original match was to be between
-the two counties, but that the sides had to be patched
-up owing to defections. It seems hardly probable
-that monetary or other reasons would prompt such
-curious combinations of men and counties. Proper
-qualification can hardly have been insisted upon;
-indeed, we find that the famous Hambledon Club,
-practically Hampshire county, was largely composed
-of Surrey men who received enthusiastic invitations
-to visit the famous Broad Halfpenny Down. Harking
-back to some stray scraps of historical interest,
-we read that in 1739 Kent, “the unconquerable
-county,” played England in the presence of 1000
-spectators, but the match ended in a fiasco, owing to
-disputes; indeed, such terminations were not very uncommon
-when party feeling ran high and betting was
-rampant. In 1746 Kent again plays England, and
-wins by a short neck, <i>i.e.</i> by one wicket, while Sussex
-and Surrey seem great rivals; Surrey, indeed, beats
-England three years later, and in 1750 loses to Kent
-by 3 runs, but wins the return by nine wickets. From<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span>
-the names quoted, it is evident that cricket flourished
-in the south rather than in the north; but cricket
-was not unknown in the big manufacturing shires, for
-we find that Manchester and Liverpool were then,
-as now, desperate rivals, as were Sheffield and
-Nottingham. Sheffield, indeed, was so strong that it
-could play, and used to play, the rest of Yorkshire
-single-handed. In a note to a match played between
-Hants and England in 1772, we find that “Lumpy,”
-for England, bowled out Small, “which thing had
-not happened for some years”! Perhaps “Lumpy”
-had secured one of those wickets on which he could
-bowl&mdash;</p>
-
-<p class="pp6 p1">For honest Lumpy did allow<br />
-He ne’er could bowl but o’er a brow.</p>
-
-<p class="p1">Hence if the wicket had a “brow,” and Lumpy
-pitched one of his “shooters” on it, Small’s downfall
-is not remarkable. However, though Hambledon
-was the best club and Hants the best county,
-England was too strong to be tackled single-handed.
-Surrey first met Kent in 1772, and beat the county of
-cherries and hops, having previously done the same
-for Hants, though in the latter case the nuisance of
-“given men” crops up on both sides; yet such games
-were clearly popular, strength being thereby equalised,
-for we find numerous matches between Hambledon
-and England in which the former club was supported
-by the presence of outsiders. However, the Hambledon
-Club, “the cradle of cricket,” with its “ale that
-would flare like turpentine”&mdash;what a use to put good<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span>
-“October” to!&mdash;“a viand (for it was more than
-liquor)” that was “vended at 2d. per pint,” collapsed
-towards the end of the century, and it was many a
-long year before Hants became great again. Alas,
-too, for Hambledon cricketers! They were not
-content to play cricket for love or for glory, but
-for stakes, the stakes being pints, doubtless of the
-famous “viand”!</p>
-
-<p>A few stray notes on the early half of the century
-may be not inappropriate, and most interesting seem
-to be the trio of matches played between England
-and Sussex in 1826. No such contest had ever taken
-place before, and the series was really arranged to
-test the relative merits of underhand bowling and
-the then new-fangled roundhand. The results may
-be regarded as conclusive. Not only did Sussex win
-the first match by seven wickets and the second by
-three wickets, but the third match was lost by the
-county by as few as 24 runs. More conclusive was
-the action of nine of the professionals, who refused,
-after the second match was over, to play in the third
-game, “unless the Sussex bowlers bowl fair&mdash;that is,
-abstain from throwing.” The triumph of the new
-style was complete, though five of the recalcitrants
-played in the third match after all. It was in the
-Kent-Sussex match of this year, Kent having some
-given men, that wides were first counted, though
-they did not appear as a separate item. Three years
-later no-balls received a similar distinction, the match
-being, nominally, between Middlesex and the M.C.C.;
-but the county had no regular organisation till five-and-thirty
-years later. Indeed, it is illustrative of the
-then condition of some so-called “county elevens,”
-that “Yorkshire” plays the Sheffield Wednesday
-C.C. and is beaten in 1830, while in 1832 Sheffield
-plays twenty-two of Yorkshire! However, in 1834
-an eleven, called Yorkshire, consisting mainly of
-Sheffielders, lost to Norfolk by no less than 272
-runs, Fuller Pilch contributing 87 not out and 73;
-yet Pilch was a Suffolk man, who was eventually
-induced to settle in Kent, though in this year he
-played for England and against Kent, which at this
-time was easily the strongest county. Next year
-Yorkshire had its revenge on Norfolk, as, though
-Pilch made 153 not out in the second innings, the
-Norfolk men surrendered, the game being hopeless,
-probably to avoid the necessity of coming up on the
-third day.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-233.jpg" width="400" height="519" id="i156"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc19" summary="c19">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. F. Watts, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE BATSMAN.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>Fuller Pilch</i>).</p>
-</div></div>
-
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>It is unnecessary to dive more deeply into dates,
-figures, and facts, beyond the important fact that
-early in the last century there were many counties
-that played cricket between themselves, and in certain
-cases could challenge the rest of England, though
-they did not exist as regularly organised societies.
-The matches were arranged by the patrons of cricket,
-as an exciting form of contest in which money was
-to be won or lost by betting, and with a view to the
-increase of the excitement, men were given to one
-side or barred from another, or else extra numbers
-were allowed as a counterpoise to extra skill, till in
-due course counties began to exist as organisations
-of themselves, with a view to county cricket pure and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span>
-simple. Their establishment, however, was a matter
-of time. Sussex led the way in 1839; Kent seems to
-have followed the lead in 1842, the year when the
-first Canterbury “Week” was held, under similar
-conditions to those that now exist; while the year
-1845 saw the birth of the Surrey Club, with the Oval
-as its cradle. Then came a gap, but in the ‘sixties
-county clubs sprang rapidly into existence&mdash;Notts
-in 1859 or 1860, Yorkshire in 1862, Hants in 1863
-(though the club collapsed early, and was resuscitated
-in 1874). Middlesex saw the light in 1864, and so
-did Lancashire. Leicestershire dates back to 1878,
-Derbyshire to 1870, while Gloucestershire is only a
-year younger, being followed by Somerset in 1875,
-by Essex in 1876, and by Warwickshire in 1882.
-With the appearance of Worcestershire on the scene
-in 1899, at least as a first-class county, we have
-reached the last-joined of the present big cricketing
-counties; but it should be clearly understood that
-the dates given are as a rule only those of the years
-in which the clubs were originally formed. Their
-pretensions to be included in the privileged list of
-those who are entitled, as being “first-class,” to take
-part in the championship competition were only
-gratified when they had by active service and
-doughty deeds established a claim to promotion.</p>
-
-<p>The formation of county clubs, especially in the
-middle of last century, may fairly be traced directly
-to the success, in finance as well as in cricket, of
-those famous organisations, the All England and the
-United All England elevens. Originally founded<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span>
-as purely financial speculations, for the promotion
-and success of which the best cricketing talent of the
-country was enlisted, they made annual progresses
-through England, meeting the picked local talent of
-all cricketing centres, generally reinforced by imported
-men, and meeting each other at Lord’s on Whit-Monday,
-this last match being regarded as at least
-the equal of the Gentlemen and Players fixture as a
-display of scientific cricket. The periodical visits of
-these skilled <i>troupes</i> not only excited the interest and
-improved the cricket of the local centres&mdash;Dr. Grace
-himself bears ample testimony to the keenness caused
-by their presence&mdash;but they also opened the eyes of
-cricket-lovers to the fact that good cricket could be
-made self-supporting. Further, they saw the immense
-progress that the game would make, and the enormous
-facilities that would be offered to that progress, in every
-county which had a club and a centre of its own. It
-may be said, indeed, that the success of these peripatetic
-teams, while it conduced to their own collapse, suggested
-and promoted the foundation of county cricket
-as it is played nowadays. The two great elevens did
-their work well and thoroughly, both for themselves
-and for the game, and when they dispersed, and their
-constituent members were drafted into the county
-elevens, they could at least claim that they had
-popularised the game, had improved the methods in
-which it was played, and had left behind them a
-valuable legacy to all those who either played or
-admired cricket. Think of this, all of you who are
-apt to remember only the pettinesses and schisms<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span>
-of those two great elevens! There were pettinesses,
-and there were schisms, but these must be forgotten
-in the recollection that the men who erred were likewise
-the men who put our first-class cricket on its
-present basis, who made the existence of county
-cricket feasible, possible, and profitable.</p>
-
-<p>It should here be noted that though only fifteen
-counties have been enumerated, the cricket-playing
-counties are by no means restricted to that number.
-Norfolk and Suffolk have for many years been cricketing
-counties. Cambridgeshire was at one time, thanks
-to Hayward, Carpenter, and Tarrant, one of the
-strongest of counties. Northamptonshire, Durham,
-Northumberland, Lincolnshire, and many others, <i>quos
-nunc perscribere longum est</i>, have all fostered cricket and
-cricketers, and if they have not come into the forefront
-of the battle yet, there is no reason why they
-should not yet figure as champions, considering the
-vigour and keenness with which the game is played
-and watched. In fact, the question of classification is
-an extremely hard one, the uncertainty of cricket and
-the part that luck plays adding most materially to
-the difficulties. By the present system the general
-results pan out pretty well, and harmonise, as a rule,
-with public opinion, but accurate organisation and
-registration, with due regard to merit, is impossible
-in a game at which such curious results are possible
-as were seen in the Yorkshire-Somerset match of
-1901. Yorkshire, undefeated, was at the head of
-the list then, as at the end of the year. Somerset,
-at the time the match was played, had won but one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span>
-match out of eight; further, the game in question
-was played on Yorkshire territory, and Somerset,
-dismissed for 97, was headed on the first innings
-by 238 runs. In the end, Somerset won by 279!
-Who can classify, who promote, who degrade, when
-such extraordinary fluctuations are possible? It is
-clearly no solution of the promotion question to
-suggest that the lowest of the first-class counties
-should play the highest of the minor counties, the
-first-class certificate being the stake. Nor are matters
-facilitated when we remember that, for financial and
-other reasons, the minor counties contend in a competition
-in which only two days are allotted to a
-match instead of three. Doubtless public opinion,
-<i>i.e.</i> the opinion of the players who are before the
-public, offered the best solution of the difficulty of
-promotion by co-opting Worcestershire into their
-ranks, the formality being of the simplest nature;
-for Worcestershire, the fresh claimant for the highest
-honours, simply announced at the Counties’ meeting
-that they had arranged to play the minimum number
-of matches that qualify for the first class with the
-requisite number of counties. The first-class counties
-co-opted Worcestershire; arbitration and adjudication
-were unnecessary.</p>
-
-<p>In the infancy of county cricket the meetings of
-the different clubs were arranged by a sort of process
-which we may appropriately describe as natural selection.
-What could be more natural than the rivalry
-between the great professional sides&mdash;I am writing
-of the ‘seventies&mdash;of Yorkshire and Nottingham,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span>
-and of both with Lancashire, and of the amateur
-elevens of Middlesex and Gloucestershire? Geographical
-convenience brought certain counties into
-close contact, and pre-eminent strength tempted others
-to ignore all difficulties, geographical and sentimental,
-and to fight the good fight to the bitter end. All
-things, indeed, seemed to be working up for some
-form of county competition, when the M.C.C., in
-1872, offered a challenge cup to be held by the
-leading county of the year. The conditions, put in
-an abbreviated form, were that a certain number of
-counties, not exceeding six, were to be selected by
-the M.C.C. as the competitors; that the matches
-were to be played at Lord’s, and apparently on the
-“knock-out” principle; in the event of a draw, the
-match was to be replayed; the cup to be retained by
-any county that could win it three years in succession.
-The competition, however, fell through, several of
-the counties withdrawing their entries, and the
-Marylebone Club consequently withdrawing its offer.
-Kent, however, played Sussex at Lord’s for perhaps
-the only time, and on “dangerously rough wickets,”
-Kent winning by 52 runs.</p>
-
-<p>It is not possible to give a list of champion
-counties that is absolutely accurate, as, until the
-competition was regulated by proper laws, and a
-recognised system of scoring points existed, the
-champions were selected partly by popular opinion,
-partly by the written opinions of the press, the two
-often differing, especially when party feeling ran
-high. In the following list, however, the opinion<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span>
-expressed by Dr. W. G. Grace in his <i>Cricket</i> has
-generally been regarded as paramount, and few will
-venture to dispute his authority.</p>
-
-
-<p class="pc1"><span class="smcap">Champion Counties, 1864-1901</span></p>
-
-<table id="tt01" summary="tt01">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1864.</td>
- <td rowspan="7"> </td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- <td rowspan="7" colspan="2"> </td>
- <td class="tdr">1883.</td>
- <td rowspan="6"> </td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1865.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1884.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1866.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Middlesex.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1885.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1867.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1886.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1868.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1887.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1869.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1888.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1870.<br />1871.<br />1872.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.<br />Notts.<br />Surrey.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1889.</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b1.jpg" width="10" height="35"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlx">Surrey<br />Lancashire<br />Surrey</td>
- <td class="tdl"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b2.jpg" width="10" height="35"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdl">equal.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1873.</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b3.jpg" width="10" height="20"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlx">Gloucestershire<br />Notts</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b4.jpg" width="10" height="20"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlm">equal.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1890.<br />1891.</td>
- <td rowspan="10"> </td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.<br />Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1874.</td>
- <td rowspan="5"> </td>
- <td class="tdl">Gloucestershire.</td>
- <td rowspan="5" colspan="2"> </td>
- <td class="tdr">1892.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1875.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1893.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1876.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Gloucestershire.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1894.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1877.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Gloucestershire.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1895.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1878.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1896.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1879.</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b3.jpg" width="10" height="20"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlx">Lancashire<br />Notts</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b4.jpg" width="10" height="20"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlm">equal.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1897.<br />1897.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Lancashire.<br />Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1880.</td>
- <td rowspan="2"> </td>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- <td rowspan="2" colspan="2"> </td>
- <td class="tdr">1899.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1881.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Lancashire.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1900.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1881.</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b3.jpg" width="10" height="20"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlx">Lancashire<br />Notts</td>
- <td class="tdr"><div class="figt">
- <img src="images/b4.jpg" width="10" height="20"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div></td>
- <td class="tdlm">equal.</td>
- <td class="tdr">1901.<br />1902.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.<br />Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<p class="p1">Thus in the last thirty-eight years, if we reckon
-in the occasions when two or more counties have
-tied for the first place, we find that the championship
-has been held by Nottinghamshire thirteen times, by
-Surrey eleven times, by Yorkshire ten times, by
-Lancashire five times, by Gloucestershire four times,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span>
-and by Middlesex once. Sussex did not lose a
-match in 1871, but only played its neighbours of
-Kent and Surrey, in a year when the three northern
-counties were particularly strong. The above list is
-of course given for what it is worth, but may be
-regarded as fairly accurate, though the conditions
-and the methods of calculation have differed so
-widely at various periods. Up to 1888, no special
-system for reckoning the “order” seems to have
-obtained, the results being practically arrived at
-“by inspection”; in that year and in 1889 the proportion
-of wins to the matches played was the
-accepted process, losses being ignored, and drawn
-games counting half a point, so that Notts, with
-nine wins and three draws in fourteen games, tied
-with Surrey and Lancashire, both of which had ten
-wins and one draw, ten points and a half, in the same
-number of matches. Next year, and till 1895,
-defeats were deducted from victories, and the points
-thus obtained decided the award, but in the latter
-year the present system was adopted: a win counts a
-point for, and a defeat counts a point against; losses
-are deducted from wins, and a ratio is calculated
-between the figure thus obtained and the number
-of finished matches, draws being ignored. Thus, if
-a county plays 20 matches, wins 11, loses 4, and
-draws 5, the figure is 11-4, <i>i.e.</i> 7; the proportional
-fraction is 7/15 (15 being the number of completed
-matches), and the figure of merit 46.66, the original
-vulgar fraction being, for the sake of convenience,
-multiplied by 100 and reduced to a decimal.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Referring back to the list once more, we note that
-Gloucestershire was not beaten in 1876 or 1877.
-Lancashire lost no match in 1881, and won six
-games with an innings to spare. Lancashire and
-Notts had identical figures in 1882; but critics were
-inclined to favour the superiority of Lancashire, as
-having beaten Notts on one of the occasions when
-the two counties met, while the other match was
-drawn. Notts in 1884 won nine games out of ten,
-and drew the tenth&mdash;a great record, eclipsed by Yorkshire,
-who lost no match in 1900, and only one in both
-1901 and 1902. Yorkshire’s career since 1889 has
-been curious: in that year she played Sussex at the
-very end of the season, the “wooden spoon” depending
-on the result; however, Yorkshire won. In 1890
-she was third. Then followed two bad years, but
-in 1893 the big county was at the top, and also in
-five of the next nine years, her lowest place being
-fourth in 1897. Surrey has a fine sequence of six
-headships, beginning with 1886, by far the largest
-series on the list.</p>
-
-<p>A word may here be added on the connection
-between the Marylebone Club and the counties.
-The club has always religiously abstained from interfering
-in county matters unasked, though reserving
-to itself the sole right of deciding all questions connected
-with the game in general. But at times there
-seem to have been signs of a little petulance on the
-part of some of the counties, or their representatives,
-kindly patronage having been mistaken for interference.
-Nothing, however, could be more satisfactory<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span>
-than the present state of things, the M.C.C.
-being regarded, as it rightly should be regarded,
-as the supreme <i>junta</i> of cricket, and consequently
-as the oracle to be consulted in case of difficulty,
-and the arbiter in the event of difference. The
-county delegates discuss all county matters, and
-refer the results of their deliberations to the M.C.C.,
-with a request that the club will duly hall-mark
-them, and settle any disputes or questions that may
-arise out of them. A powerful neutral is indeed
-necessary as arbitrator, seeing that the County
-Cricket Council, which was born in 1887, proclaimed
-its own dissolution in 1890, having shown no great
-capacity for managing its own affairs.</p>
-
-<p>We may now note a few of the more important
-landmarks in the history of county cricket. The
-question of qualification, as already stated, was raised
-as early as in 1868, for it was felt to be an abuse, as
-well as unfair to certain counties, that men should be
-allowed to represent two counties in one year; it
-was, however, an unwritten law that a man did not
-play against the county of his birth, even if he did
-not play for it. Thus Howitt, who was practically
-identified with Middlesex, did not play against his
-native Notts. Southerton, however, who played
-regularly for Surrey by the residential qualification,
-always represented Sussex against Surrey, often to
-the discomfiture of his foster-county. However,
-it was not till 1872 that formal legislation took
-place, when the following arrangements were
-made:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="ph4 p1">(1) No man to play for more than one county in
-the same year.</p>
-
-<p class="ph4">(2) Any player with a double qualification to state
-at the beginning of each season for which of
-the counties he proposed to play.</p>
-
-<p class="ph4">(3) Three years’ <i>bona fide</i> residence to qualify
-professionals; two years sufficient for
-amateurs.</p>
-
-<p class="p1">These regulations were passed at Lord’s, but next
-year a meeting, held at the Oval, asked that the
-Lord’s authorities would put professionals and
-amateurs on the same footing, and two years of
-residence are now required of both alike. It was
-also enacted that under the term “residence” was
-included the parental roof, provided that it was
-open to a man as an occasional home. Lord Harris
-proposed in 1880 that the two years should be
-reduced to one, but did not carry his motion, though
-it was and is felt that in certain cases, <i>e.g.</i> in that of
-an Englishman born in India, or of an officer home
-on furlough, the rule bears rather hardly. It was
-further passed in 1898 that a man who had played
-for a particular county for five years was permanently
-qualified for it, provided that the series had not been
-broken by his playing for another.</p>
-
-<p>It seems hardly credible, considering what county
-cricket has grown to be, to hear that not till 1890
-was any real classification of counties undertaken;
-however, it was at a meeting of the moribund
-Cricket Council, held at the Oval on 11th August,
-that eight counties were pronounced to be first-class,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span>
-and to be the competitors for the championship in
-1891. The sacred eight were:&mdash;</p>
-
-<table id="tt02" summary="tt02">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Notts.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Kent.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Yorkshire.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Lancashire.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Middlesex.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Sussex.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Surrey.</td>
- <td class="tdl">Gloucestershire.</td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<p class="p1">And these were to play home and home matches
-with each other. In 1892&mdash;prospective legislation
-this&mdash;the lowest of the first-class counties was to
-play the highest of the second-class for its place, and
-various details were worked out in connection with
-this scheme, but when the Council assembled at
-Lord’s on 8th December of the same year, so much
-difficulty and trouble occurred over the question of
-classification that it was felt to be a relief when a
-representative of Middlesex jumped up and proposed
-that “this Council do adjourn <i>sine die</i>.” The
-resolution was accepted with gratitude, and the
-County Cricket Council was no more.</p>
-
-<p>Next year Somersetshire, having arranged a purely
-first-class programme, announced the fact at the
-annual meeting of county secretaries, and was duly
-recognised as a first-class county. In 1894 the
-matches played by Warwickshire, Derbyshire, Hampshire,
-Leicestershire, and Essex were recognised as
-first-class, though for convenience the counties were
-considered to be outside the competition for that year.
-In 1899 Worcestershire made a similar announcement
-to that of Somerset, and was admitted into the
-sacred circle, thus making the number of first-class
-counties up to fifteen. With these increases in the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span>
-number of competitors, it was clearly impossible to
-maintain the original principle that each county
-should play home and home matches with every
-other, especially in those years when an Australian
-eleven was in England. Some of the larger and
-richer counties manage to get through so huge a
-programme, even with Australian matches thrown in,
-but in ordinary years the original number of eight
-is retained as the qualifying number, reducible by
-decree of the M.C.C. in those years when reduction
-is necessary. It was in consequence of the increase in
-the number of the playing counties that the proportional
-system of 1895 was introduced.</p>
-
-<p>We may now glance at the history of the various
-first-class counties, taking them seriatim; and I must
-here express my indebtedness to K. S. Ranjitsinhji’s
-<i>Jubilee Book of Cricket</i>, which is a perfect mine of
-information on the subject.</p>
-
-<p><i>Derbyshire.</i>&mdash;Though the county club only came
-to its birth in 1870, cricket had long flourished in the
-land, fostered largely, as one authority tells us, by the
-clergy. “The game in Derbyshire,” he tells us,
-“owes much at one time and another to the parsons&mdash;a
-fact that is perhaps worthy of more general
-recognition than is sometimes allowed.” The first
-appearance of the new county was remarkable, as on
-the Old Trafford ground, in its very first match,
-it defeated no less a side than Lancashire by an
-innings and 11 runs, the home county mustering no
-more than 25 notches in its first innings, when
-Gregory actually had six wickets for 9 runs. So<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span>
-strong was the county attack in its early days,
-Gregory being reinforced by Platts and Hickton, Flint,
-W. Mycroft, and Hay, that the eleven was jestingly
-described as consisting of ten bowlers and a wicket-keeper,
-the batting being by no means powerful.
-Mycroft was one of the most formidable bowlers in
-England, but with the decadence of himself and the
-rest of the band, the bowling weakened as the batting
-improved, though at last the latter, thanks partly to
-the transfer of good men to other counties, failed so
-sadly that in 1887 the county was reduced to the
-second class, only to be restored in 1895, and in that
-year to reach as high a place as fifth in the championship
-competition. Fine bowling was again the chief
-contributory to this success, G. G. Walker, George
-Davidson, Porter, and Hume, with Storer to keep
-wicket, being backed by such good batsmen as
-S. H. Evershed, L. G. Wright, and Chatterton. In
-Davidson and Storer, indeed, Derbyshire possessed a
-pair of wonderfully fine all-round men, Davidson’s
-premature death being a grievous loss. Last year
-(1902) the fortunes of Derbyshire were not particularly
-brilliant, but the county, always a by-word for bad
-luck, especially at one period when it seemed impossible
-for its captain to win the toss, made a good step
-forward. It is unfortunate for a hard-working and
-enthusiastic committee that the Derby public gives
-to cricket but one tithe of the support that it
-lavishes on football; however, there are plenty of
-liberal supporters of the club, which has also, in its
-times of need, proved its ability for raising the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[171]</a></span>
-necessary funds by means of bazaars and the like.
-The ground, which is at Derby, has a total extent of
-eleven acres, with a good pavilion and an excellent
-pitch.</p>
-
-<p>Essex, founded in 1874, originally settled at
-Brentwood, but migrated to Leyton, as a more accessible
-place. The county has had a hard fight in the
-past to make both ends meet; indeed, at one time the
-end seemed to be at hand, but kindly friends, chiefly
-in the persons of C. M. Tebbut and C. E. Green,
-helped it out of its trouble. To the latter’s
-enthusiasm the very existence of the club is largely
-due. Created first-class in 1895, Essex has never
-achieved the championship, though it has more than
-once knocked possible champions out, especially in its
-earlier years, when the ground was not all that a batsman
-could desire; but in 1901, thanks to some of the
-modern patent “mixtures” used in dressing the pitch,
-so easy was the wicket that it was impossible, apparently,
-to get batsmen out, and the scoring was in
-consequence abnormally large. By way of revenge,
-when the ground is spoilt by rain, it is absolutely
-unplayable. In cricketers Essex has been rich: C. J.
-Kortright is one of the fastest bowlers of this age
-or any other, and in the days of rough pitches was a
-terror to the county’s opponents; C. M’Gahey and
-P. Perrin, known as “the Essex twins,” have helped
-to win or save many a match; while in Young, an ex-sailor,
-the county unearthed a bowler who was good
-enough to play for England in 1899, but has done
-little or nothing since. The name of A. P. Lucas<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[172]</a></span>
-must not be omitted, as, though he is now some
-forty-six years old, he plays cricket in as sound
-and stylish a fashion as when he was an undergraduate
-at Cambridge. As before hinted, though
-Essex has never been close up for the championship,
-it has always been a factor to be reckoned
-with.</p>
-
-<p>Gloucestershire is, of course, “the county of the
-Graces,” which is synonymous with stating that its
-fortunes have been watched and assisted by three of
-the most talented and experienced cricketers who
-have ever taken the field. In the early days, it
-seemed to exist by them and for them; but though
-professional talent appeared but slowly, a sturdy band
-of amateurs soon gathered round the brotherhood,
-and showed that good batting, especially when attended
-by superb fielding, can compensate for only fair
-bowling. Such men as W. O. Moberley, F. Townsend,
-W. Fairbanks, W. R. Gilbert, and J. A. Bush
-(the wicket-keeper) were both scorers and savers of
-runs. Of the Graces it is needless to say anything;
-they were batsmen, bowlers, and fieldsmen, all of
-different types, but all of one class. E. M.’s fielding
-at point was only to be matched by G. F.’s at long-leg
-and W. G.’s anywhere, while it was mainly in
-county cricket that the Doctor’s famous leg-trap was
-so successful. Pages might be devoted to what the
-champion did for Gloucestershire, but probably no
-individual triumph ever delighted him so much as
-that it should, in 1874, four years after its foundation,
-be the champion county of England. It was in a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[173]</a></span>
-Gloucestershire match that Grace scored his hundredth
-century, completed the 1000 runs that he made in the
-single month of May 1895, and twice scored a
-double century, <i>v.</i> Kent in 1887 and <i>v.</i> Yorkshire in
-1888. To pry deeper with the pen into the great
-man’s performance would be to write, what has been
-written before, a history of modern cricket or his
-own biography: the works would be almost identical.
-Woof is undoubtedly the best professional bowler
-that the county has unearthed, just as Board is the
-best wicket-keeper, but Midwinter, the Anglo-Australian,
-Paish, and Roberts have all done good
-service with the ball. Ferris, however, another
-Australian who settled in Gloucestershire, quite lost
-his bowling as his batting improved. Of more
-recent players the most prominent are undoubtedly
-Charles Townsend, son of the aforementioned
-Frank Townsend, and G. L. Jessop. Like Ferris,
-the former lost a little of his bowling when he became&mdash;he
-has now apparently retired&mdash;the best left-handed
-batsman in England. Of Jessop’s hurricane hitting
-and rapid scoring the whole cricket world has
-heard and talked. The county ground is at Bristol,
-and is well equipped for its purpose, but the more
-famous cricket used to be played on the grounds of
-Clifton and Cheltenham Colleges, the Cheltenham
-“Week” being one of the events of the season.
-One hears, however, that the Clifton cricket ground
-will be used no more for county matches, owing to
-the lack of local support. In the early days the
-matches between Middlesex and Gloucestershire, two<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[174]</a></span>
-teams of powerful amateur batsmen, were famous for
-the long scoring that prevailed.</p>
-
-<p>Hampshire, as already stated, was the champion
-county as far back as, roughly speaking, 1780, its
-famous downs, Windmill Down and Broad Halfpenny
-Down, having been the scene of many great
-contests in the days when the Hambledon Club was
-the champion of England. The history of those days
-and of the heroes of those days has been so often and
-so admirably written, besides being somewhat foreign
-to the scope of this chapter, that one need do little
-more than record the names of David Harris and
-William Beldham, as the champion bowler and batsman
-of their day. But Hampshire found that cricket,
-like everything else, is transient and ephemeral, and
-almost a century after the championship days, in
-1874, to be accurate, the old Cambridge captain,
-Clement Booth, worked hard to restore the county’s
-old prestige. Even his energy failed, for, as already
-noted, it was not till 1894 that the county was
-recognised as being of first-class merit. Hampshire
-has naturally been the county of the soldier cricketer,
-and can boast of E. G. Wynyard and R. M. Poore
-as being probably the best batsmen that ever wore
-the King’s uniform, J. E. Greig, another soldier, being
-but little behind them. What the value of these
-men was to the county is amply demonstrated by the
-fact that in the absence of the first two Hants won
-never a match in 1900, but with Greig’s appearance
-next year the county, with six each of wins, losses,
-and draws, at least gave as good as she got. In
-E. I. M. Barrett and the professional Barton the
-army is still further represented in the Hampshire
-ranks, with a new and valuable civilian recruit in
-Llewelyn. In fact, now that the piping times of
-peace have arrived, and the soldier cricketers listen
-for the pavilion’s bell rather than the <i>réveillé</i> of the
-bugle, Hants may well hope to find herself higher
-up the ladder of cricket. Other good names are
-those of the two Cantabs, A. J. L. Hill and F. E.
-Lacey, the present secretary of the M.C.C. The
-ground, a very fine one, is in, or rather near,
-Southampton, the club having bought the freehold
-of it, and it is a great improvement on the classical
-but unsuitable Antelope ground, situated in the
-middle of the town.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-253.jpg" width="400" height="580" id="i174"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>AN OLD “PLAY” BILL.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[175]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Kent was one of the pioneers of cricket, the
-earliest match which she played as a county dating
-back to 1711, nearly two hundred years ago, when
-she tackled an eleven of All England. It was, however,
-a full century later when she was at her prime,
-supported by such famous performers as Alfred
-Mynn, Fuller Pilch, Adams, Wenman, “Felix,”
-and others; but of these Pilch was a Suffolk man,
-who was induced to settle in Kent and give his
-services to the county. Mynn was probably one of
-the finest all-round cricketers that ever lived&mdash;a fine
-bat, tremendous hitter, and a grand bowler of the
-very fast type; yet it is recorded that “off one of
-Mr. Mynn’s tremendous shooters” T. A. Anson, a
-Cantab wicket-keeper, stumped a man, “using the
-left hand only”! In later days Kent has continued<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[176]</a></span>
-to flourish exceedingly, but has never achieved
-champion honours, being, as a rule, like most of the
-southern counties, deficient in bowling, though
-Willsher, whose career terminated in the early
-‘seventies, was a left-handed bowler who was second
-to none. He was also the hero of the first great
-no-balling incident. No one has worked harder
-for Kent cricket, and cricket in general, than Lord
-Harris, to whose vigour, and to whose enthusiastic
-efforts to enforce the proper spirit in which the
-game should be played, the county owes a deep debt
-of gratitude. The headquarters of the county club,
-which was established in 1842, the year of the first
-Canterbury “Week,” are at Canterbury, but the
-executive rightly believes in the distribution of matches
-throughout the county, and we find that county
-games have been played, and are still played, not
-merely at Canterbury, but at Gravesend, Catford Bridge,
-Beckenham, Tonbridge&mdash;where there is also a “week,”&mdash;Maidstone,
-Tunbridge Wells, and Blackheath&mdash;truly
-a goodly list for a county that is not abnormally large.
-The Mote ground at Maidstone probably possesses a
-greater slope than any other ground on which great
-games are played. Among the more famous Kent
-cricketers we may quote the names of W. Yardley,
-W. H. Patterson, J. R. Mason, F. Marchant,
-W. Rashleigh, E. F. S. Tylecote, Stanley Christopherson,
-the brothers Penn, W. M. Bradley, C. J. Burnup,
-and Hearnes innumerable. Than J. R. Mason, the
-late captain, there are few finer all-round men.</p>
-
-<p>Lancashire dates back to 1864 as a county club,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[177]</a></span>
-but Liverpool and Manchester had long had strong
-clubs of their own, and at present the whole county
-is a perfect hotbed of cricket. Nowhere is a more
-critical and enthusiastic body of spectators to be found,
-though cricket “caught on” later in Lancashire, as
-in other northern counties, than in the south. The
-bulk of the big matches, including one test match
-when the Australians are in evidence, are played at
-the Old Trafford ground in Manchester, where there
-is huge accommodation and a capital pavilion, a
-reduced facsimile of that at Lord’s; but the wicket,
-though the turf is excellent, is often on the slow side,
-as Manchester is a rainy spot. A certain number of
-big matches are also allotted to the Aigburth ground,
-Liverpool. It would be hard to say who is the finest
-player that the county has produced, but it is easy
-to name the most popular and the most famous,
-namely, A. N. Hornby, the present president, who
-played his first county match in 1867, and has only
-recently retired from county cricket. He was for
-many years the captain of the team and has probably
-stolen more runs (and run more partners out) than
-any other cricketer. From a mere cricket point
-of view, A. G. Steel is doubtless the greatest of
-Lancastrians as an all-round player, but his career
-was all too short, while another equally famous
-Lancastrian, A. C. Maclaren, holds the record for
-the highest individual score made in big cricket, to
-wit, his 424, made against Somerset in 1895. Like
-Hornby, he is a Harrovian, while Steel, as all the
-world knows, or ought to know, hails from Marlborough.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[178]</a></span>
-Among other great amateurs who have
-played for the county should be mentioned the names
-of Appleby, Rowley, Makinson, F. W. Wright,
-Eccles, and Crossfield, while the roll of professionals
-is equally famous&mdash;Barlow, Briggs, Watson, Mold,
-Crossland, Albert Ward, Tyldesley, Pilling (prince of
-wicket-keepers), Frank Sugg, and others. It is a
-curious fact, however, that no less than four of the
-great Lancashire bowlers have, rightly or wrongly,
-been severely criticised, and even penalised, for throwing
-when they were supposed to be bowling.</p>
-
-<p>Leicestershire took to itself a county club in 1878,
-the very first match being played against the first
-Australian eleven, and a very fair fight being made
-against that strong team. Matches had, however,
-been played under the title of “Leicestershire”
-between the years 1789 and 1829. Like other
-counties, Leicestershire has had some hard times,
-pecuniarily, to pass through, but now that the storm
-has been safely weathered and a permanent home
-found, greater prosperity in every sense may be
-hoped for. It cannot be said that the county has
-hitherto had great success in the county contests, as
-eleventh is the highest place it has yet reached; but
-the 1902 eleven was considered to be much stronger
-than any other that had represented the county,
-so that, as there is plenty of fight left in the men,
-better results may be looked for. Pougher is probably
-the best all-round man that Leicestershire has produced,
-the bright, particular star in his career being
-the bowling down of five Australian wickets for <i>no</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[179]</a></span>
-runs. This occurred at Lord’s in 1896. In C. E.
-de Trafford, the present captain, Leicestershire possesses
-one of the hardest hitters and fastest scorers in
-England, and in Woodcock one of the fastest bowlers.
-Among its amateur players have been numbered, or
-are numbered, R. A. H. Mitchell, T. S. Pearson,
-H. P. Arnall Thompson, G. S. and C. Marriott,
-C. J. B. Wood, and Dr. R. Macdonald, and, of
-professionals, King, Knight, Geeson, Whiteside,
-Parnham, Rylott, Wheeler, Warren, and Tomlin.</p>
-
-<p>The Middlesex County Club first saw the light
-in 1864, the year of Lancashire’s birth, but, like all
-other counties, had played matches long anterior to
-that year under the style and title of “Middlesex”; in
-fact, in 1802 and 1803, as mentioned before, twenty-two
-of Middlesex encountered twenty-two of Surrey.
-Middlesex is as much “the county of the Walkers”
-as Gloucestershire is “the county of the Graces,”
-for the name of John Walker is identified with
-the county as closely as are the initials V. E., R. D.,
-and I. D. Indeed, it is to their perseverance and
-enthusiasm, to say nothing of their unbounded
-generosity, that the club ever existed or continued to
-exist. The first home of the club was a ground near
-the Cattle Market, in Islington. It then migrated to
-the Athletic Club’s ground at Lillie Bridge, and was
-nearly dissolved for want of funds. A migration to
-Prince’s ground in Chelsea helped to replenish the
-treasury, and a final resting-place&mdash;at least all hope
-it will prove to be final&mdash;was found at Lord’s in
-1877. It is noteworthy that in 1866, only two years<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[180]</a></span>
-after the club’s foundation, Middlesex was the
-champion county, and was specially invited to play
-All England next year; but the result was disastrous.
-The weakness of Middlesex was always due to a
-dearth of bowling; in amateur batting Gloucestershire
-itself was hardly its superior; but of late years J. T.
-Hearne was in the very first flight of bowlers, as also
-A. E. Trott, the Australian professional. Howitt,
-of Nottingham, long did good service, as also Burton,
-Clarke, Phillips, and Rawlin, most of whom&mdash;one
-blushes to say it&mdash;were aliens. Several brotherhoods
-have done good service to Middlesex&mdash;in triads, the
-Walkers, Studds, and Fords, and in pairs, the
-Lytteltons, Webbes, and Douglases; while of the
-individuals who have been at the very top of the tree
-may be mentioned especially the three Walkers, C. T.
-Studd, A. J. Webbe, Sir T. C. O’Brien, A. W.
-Ridley, T. S. Pearson, G. F. Vernon, A. E. Stoddart,
-F. G. J. Ford, S. W. Scott, C. I. Thornton, G.
-MacGregor, E. A. Nepean, and a host of others
-who are only in a sense of the word “minor lights.”
-To attempt to single out individuals for comparison
-would be equally hopeless and invidious; it is only
-when we recall the weakness of the Middlesex
-bowling that we appreciate the strength of the batting
-that has enabled it to hold its own, though since
-1866 championship honours have not come the
-metropolitan county’s way. It has, however, till last
-year, 1902, held a high place. Among its amateur
-bowlers should be mentioned the Walkers&mdash;of course,&mdash;J.
-Robertson, A. F. J. Ford, E. A. Nepean,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[181]</a></span>
-C. K. Francis, A. W. Ridley, and E. Rutter, while
-no county has produced such a trio of amateur
-wicket-keepers as M. Turner, Hon. A. Lyttelton,
-and Gregor MacGregor, the present captain of the
-side.</p>
-
-<p>Nottinghamshire played its first match in 1771,
-but the Trent Bridge ground was not opened till
-1839, nor the club formed till 1859 or 1860; but
-it is safe to say that no club has sent forth such a
-stream of great cricketers, some to play for their own
-county, and some to take out naturalisation papers
-in others, to say nothing of hosts of useful second-class
-players and practice-bowlers. The Trent
-Bridge ground, originally opened by the famous
-slow bowler William Clarke, is rather larger than
-most grounds, and tries the batsman’s powers of
-endurance rather severely, but the pavilion and the
-other appointments of the ground are inferior to
-none, Lord’s alone and the Oval being excepted.
-Of the famous players the name is legion; posterity
-and contemporaries must settle among themselves
-as to whether George Parr (the great leg-hitter),
-Daft (the stylist), Shrewsbury (the all-patient), W.
-Gunn (the personification of style and patience
-combined), or Barnes were the greatest, not forgetting
-that among Notts batsmen were such men as
-A. O. Jones, J. A. Dixon, and J. G. Beevor, with
-William Oscroft, Selby, Wild, Summers, Flowers,
-and Guy, while the bowling names are a dazzling
-array of talent&mdash;Clarke, Tinley, Jackson, Grundy,
-Alfred Shaw, J. C. Shaw, Morley, Flowers, Martin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[182]</a></span>
-M’Intyre, Attewell, and John Gunn, with Biddulph,
-Sherwin, and Wild as wicket-keepers; while to the
-best of bowlers should be added the name of Lockwood,
-who, unsuccessful for his native county, has
-done wonderful work for his adopted county, Surrey.
-Notts has been champion in no less than thirteen
-years, and thus heads the list.</p>
-
-<p>Somersetshire can boast of no recorded antiquity
-as a cricketing society, the county club only being
-inaugurated in 1875. Curiously enough, the first
-meeting to consider the proposed club was held at
-Sidmouth, and the first circular issued from Ilfracombe,
-both Devonshire towns. It was not till 1891 that
-Somerset, having defeated all the other second-class
-counties, passed into the upper ranks, being then
-almost as strong as it ever has been since. The
-county ground at Taunton is a gem, but rather a
-small gem; hence hits into churchyard and river are
-not infrequent, and scoring rules high. Further, it is
-a tradition of the county that it generally beats Surrey,
-and not seldom Yorkshire, in the Taunton match.
-Of its players, H. T. Hewett was a splendid left-handed
-forcing player; L. C. H. Palairet is a grand
-player and a stylist that has no rival; his brother,
-R. C. N., who has partly retired, was always valuable,
-but inferior to his elder brother; S. M. J. Woods
-has lost his wonderful bowling, but is a fine and
-scoring batsman; V. T. Hill was a wonderful hitter,
-while J. B. Challen, C. E. Dunlop, W. C. Hadley,
-and G. Fowler were all useful men. No great
-professional players have as yet been unearthed, as
-Braund is a Surrey man who has cast in his lot with
-the western county, though Tyler, Nicholls, Cranfield,
-and Gill were, or are, a fairly good quartette
-of bowlers; but bowling has always been a weak point,
-ever since Woods strained his side. There has never
-been a dearth of wicket-keeping, all amateur, such
-names as A. E. Newton, Rev. A. P. Wickham, and
-L. H. Gay being famous. It must be admitted,
-however, that, with its crack players ageing, and new
-blood not being forthcoming, the prospects of
-Somersetshire are not at their brightest; but whatever
-the brilliancy of the prospects, there can be no
-question as to the brilliancy of the cricket as
-played both in the present and in the past. No
-side has been more exhilarating in its methods
-than the sides captained successively by Hewett
-and Woods.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-263.jpg" width="400" height="257" id="i182"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc20" summary="c20">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Thos. Rowlandson.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>RURAL SPORTS OR A CRICKET MATCH EXTRAORDINARY AT BALL’S POND, NEWINGTON,
-ON OCT. 3rd, 1811.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>Probably the return Match to that mentioned in the advertisement facing page 152.</i>)</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[183]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Though Surrey has only been champion eleven
-times to Nottinghamshire’s thirteen, yet she might
-quite fairly assume the words <i>nulli secunda</i> as her
-motto. Not that unbroken success has been the law
-of her existence, for there were times when Surrey’s
-fortunes were at a very low ebb, but patience and
-perseverance have enabled the county to win its way
-upward, while in the list of brilliant cricketers few
-counties, perhaps none, can claim the right to enrol
-more names. The foundation of the club dates
-back to 1845, the first match between Surrey and
-England to 1747, and by the end of that century,
-when the dispersion of the Hambledon Club set
-several Surrey players&mdash;Beldham (“Silver Billy”)<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[184]</a></span>
-among them&mdash;free to return to their native shire,
-the county was actually strong enough to play
-fourteen of England, but then almost collapsed,
-as far as organised cricket was concerned, for over
-thirty years. With resuscitation came success, and
-for three consecutive years, 1849-51, Surrey was
-unbeaten, her successes continuing till the ‘seventies,
-and being due to such fine amateurs as F. P. Miller,
-C. G. Lane, and F. Burbridge, supported by H. H.
-Stephenson, Lockyer, Southerton, Griffith, Mortlock,
-Julius Cæsar, Jupp, the brothers Humphrey, Caffyn,
-Street, and Pooley. But as these men passed into
-the veteran stage, no others of equal merit arose to
-take their place, and with the bowling sadly deteriorated,
-the position of Surrey was quite unworthy of
-its name and fame, though by a kind of spurt she
-was champion county in 1872, Jupp, the Humphreys,
-Pooley, and Southerton being the chief factors in this
-success, which was not repeated for fifteen years,
-when for six consecutive seasons Surrey headed the
-table. It was mainly the stubborn discipline of John
-Shuter, the Winchester cricketer, that kept the eleven
-together during its period of depression, and he had
-his reward when Lohmann, Bowley, Beaumont, and
-Sharpe, by their excellent bowling, did much to make
-their foster-county&mdash;none of these were natives of
-Surrey&mdash;forge ahead and stay ahead. In later days
-Richardson and W. Lockwood (the discarded Nottinghamshire
-player) bore the brunt of the bowling.
-It is instructive to note that so many of the Surrey
-bowlers have been born in other counties, but if even<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[185]</a></span>
-the fact lends itself to criticism from one point of
-view, it at least throws excellent light on the Surrey
-system of selection and training where young players
-are concerned. Surrey’s wicket-keepers have been
-Lockyer, Pooley, and Wood in practically unbroken
-succession, and all three were of the best, Lockyer’s
-name being worthy of classification with those of
-Pilling and Blackham. Of her batsmen, the names
-of some of her professionals have already been
-mentioned, but there are others who are and will
-be equally, or more, famous&mdash;those, to wit, of Abel
-and Hayward, Maurice Read and Brockwell, and
-in a less degree Lockwood and Holland. Among
-amateur batsmen the name of W. W. Read is a
-name that will never be forgotten, nor those of the
-successive captains&mdash;J. Shuter, K. J. Key, and D. L.
-A. Jephson, while we may add those of W. E. Roller,
-H. D. G. Leveson-Gower, F. H. Boult, C. W.
-Burls, V. F. S. Crawford, as those of men who have
-at different periods rendered good service to the
-county. Though not situated amid picturesque
-scenery, the Oval is <i>qua</i> cricket ground perfect, the
-accommodation being ample and the wickets superb.
-The new pavilion alone cost from £25,000 to
-£30,000. The Prince of Wales is the county’s
-landlord.</p>
-
-<p>Sussex can boast a venerable antiquity and the
-royal patronage of George IV. when he was Prince
-of Wales, these being the days of William Lillywhite,
-the “Nonpareil,” Box and the Broadbridges, to say
-nothing of C. G. Taylor, the Cantab “crack.” The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[186]</a></span>
-county club was formed in 1839 on Brown’s ground,
-the said Brown being the famous fast bowler, who is
-said to have bowled through a coat, and to have
-killed a dog on the other side! But the builder was
-inexorable in Brighton, and the county was hustled
-from place to place, till it settled finally&mdash;it is hoped&mdash;in
-its present splendid ground at Hove, which is,
-however, save in the comfort of its appointment,
-not one whit better for cricket purposes than the
-Brunswick ground, which the county used between
-1847 and 1871. In modern times the names of
-great Sussex bowlers are few, Southerton playing but
-rarely, and the others being Tate, the brothers Hide,
-Parris, and Walter Humphreys, the “Lobster.”
-The earlier names include those of several Lillywhites,
-Wisden, Brown, and Dean, while of wicket-keepers
-we may quote those of Box and Ellis, Harry
-Phillips, and Harry Butt. One is almost bewildered
-by the dazzling list of great batsmen who have
-represented Sussex&mdash;C. G. Taylor, Wisden, J. M.
-Cotterill, L. Winslow, R. T. Ellis, W. Newham, G.
-Brann, F. M. Lucas, Bean, Killick, and Marlow, to
-say nothing of the great Anglo-Australian player,
-W. L. Murdoch, who settled in Sussex and was at
-once invited to captain the eleven. But great as
-these names are, the names of C. B. Fry and K. S.
-Ranjitsinhji are perhaps even greater. They are
-household words at present, as are their wonderful
-feats with the bat, which&mdash;as the tale is not yet
-complete&mdash;may be left to be chronicled by posterity.
-At the present day, were the Sussex bowling in any<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[187]</a></span>
-sense on a par with its batting, the county would
-probably carry all before it. One record of Fry’s
-should, however, be recorded, as it is so far ahead
-of any similar feat. In 1901 he actually scored six
-successive centuries, the scores being: 106 <i>v.</i> Hants,
-209 <i>v.</i> Yorks, 149 <i>v.</i> Middlesex, 105 <i>v.</i> Surrey,
-140 <i>v.</i> Kent, and 105 <i>v.</i> Yorkshire. The last of
-these was made for an Eleven of England, all the
-others for Sussex. No one else, not even W. G.
-Grace, has ever made more than three hundreds in
-succession.</p>
-
-<p>The Warwickshire County C.C. only dates back
-to 1882, but it was some years before it “caught
-on,” though it was the energy of William Ansell in
-pushing the club that led not only to its recognition,
-but, more or less directly, to the dissolution of the
-County Cricket Council. Being first of the second-class
-counties in 1892 and 1893&mdash;bracketed with
-Derbyshire in the latter year&mdash;it was duly promoted
-to higher rank, and opened the 1894 season in
-sensational fashion by defeating, in rapid succession,
-Notts, Surrey, and Kent, no other county being
-successful that year in beating Surrey at the Oval.
-The county has always held its own well, even
-though, with the exception of the internationals,
-Lilley and W. G. Quaife, it has produced no very
-prominent men: it has won its way by steady and
-consistent cricket, rather than by brilliancy. The
-Quaifes&mdash;there are two of them&mdash;were originally
-Sussex men, and it is but right to record that a good
-deal of feeling was caused by the manner of their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[188]</a></span>
-secession. The present<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> and the only captain of the
-club is an old Eton and Cambridge captain, H. W.
-Bainbridge, who has been blessed in having so superlative
-a wicket-keeper as Lilley, and such prodigies of
-steadiness as Quaife and Kinneir, to serve under him.
-L. C. Docker, the brothers Hill, and T. S. Fishwick
-are the better-known amateurs, with Devey, Charlesworth,
-Santall, Hargreave, Field, Pallett, Shilton,
-Diver, and Whitehead among the professionals, few
-or none of whom have made a great stir in the
-cricket world. The county ground is at Edgbaston,
-a suburb of Birmingham, and being well equipped in
-every way, was selected as the scene of the first test
-match played in 1902, a match that is dealt with in
-a later chapter.</p>
-
-<p>The existence of Worcestershire, the latest recruit
-to the first class, may be considered as due to the
-superlative excellence of three brothers, the brothers
-Foster of Malvern College, whose initials, W. L.,
-H. K., and R. E., are as familiar as are those of the
-Studds, Graces, or Walkers; indeed, some wit, with
-a keen ear for assonance, has dubbed the county
-“Fostershire.” Splendid batsmen as they all are, no
-one of them is a bowler, wherein they fall behind the
-three great fraternities quoted above. The family
-has, however, a record of its own, as in 1899, playing
-against Hampshire, R. E. scored 134 and 101 not
-out, and W. L. 140 and 172 not out; further,
-R. E. has a private record of <i>his</i> own, having made<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[189]</a></span>
-102 not out and 136 against the Players at Lord’s
-in 1900. In Burrows, Wilson, Arnold, and Bowley,
-with Straw to keep wicket, Worcestershire has put
-some useful professionals into the field, while the
-other better-known amateurs are W. W. Lowe,
-G. Simpson-Hayward, and the Bromley-Martins.
-The county ground is to be found at Worcester, and,
-like most of its sort, is in all respects excellent.</p>
-
-<p>On Yorkshire cricket, and especially on Yorkshire
-bowlers, volumes might be written, but powerful as
-the county is now in the present, and has been in
-the past, it has not been free from the ordinary
-vicissitudes of life in general and of cricket in
-particular, to which fact allusion has been made
-earlier in this chapter. It has also been stated before
-that Sheffield was the original home of Yorkshire
-cricket, being a club strong enough to play the rest
-of the county and beat it, and boasting in Dearman
-and Marsden, the famous left-hander, two of the
-great stars of the early nineteenth century. However,
-the county club was organised in 1862, with the
-Sheffield ground at Bramall Lane as its headquarters,
-though the big county is so rich in fine grounds that
-it distributes its favours among many towns. In the
-plethora of great professionals the amateur element
-has always been in a minority in the county eleven,
-though the names of Lord Hawke, T. L. Taylor,
-Frank Mitchell, and F. S. Jackson, and in a quieter
-way of George Savile, Rev. E. S. Carter, A. Sellers,
-F. W. Milligan, E. T. Hirst, and R. W. Frank,
-will always be familiar to cricketers, to which may<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[190]</a></span>
-be added that of G. A. B. Leatham, whose wicket-keeping
-powers would have found him a place in
-many a good county eleven; but the county of
-Pinder and the two Hunters has not been hard up
-for a custodian for many years. Of the amateurs, be
-it said that no more brilliant all-round cricketer has
-walked out of a pavilion than F. S. Jackson, and
-that in Lord Hawke the county found an ideal man,
-apart from his batting powers, to command its side,
-a side, too, that has for many years been composed
-exclusively of Yorkshire-born men. Lord Hawke
-found the county at a low ebb, shared its struggle
-upward, and is finally the proud leader of a body of
-men that lost but two county matches in three years,
-and he has had the additional satisfaction of helping
-to raise the county to such admirable financial condition,
-that it is able to treat its professionals with a
-liberality that but few other counties can emulate or
-even approach. It is not unnatural in consequence
-that the Yorkshire eleven should be practically a
-band of very happy and contented brothers. The
-names of the great county bowlers are legion: every
-one has read of Freeman and Emmett, Ulyett and
-Bates and Peate, Hirst and Rhodes, Slinn, Atkinson,
-Allan Hill, Peel, Haigh, Ulyett and Wainwright,
-but one notes with interest how many of these have
-been left-handers. Then the batsmen&mdash;Stephenson
-(E.), Rowbotham, Iddison (a lob bowler of much
-merit), the Greenwoods (Luke and Andrew),
-Ephraim Lockwood (of wonderful cutting powers),
-Bates, Louis Hall (the pioneer of stickers), Peel,
-Brown and Tunnicliffe, Denton and Wainwright,
-<i>cum multis aliis</i>. It is indeed a wonderful list of
-names, names of cricketers of all sorts and conditions,
-as versatile as they are numerous. One wonders,
-considering the years that they cover, that Yorkshire
-has ever been anything but champion county, especially
-as the names excluded are only a whit less well
-known than those that are included.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-273.jpg" width="400" height="240" id="i190"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>THE CRICKET GROUND AT DARNALL, NEAR SHEFFIELD.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[191]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Such in brief is the history, a mere sketch, of our
-more important counties, their rise and their fall:
-a full and complete account of them would fill the
-whole of a goodly volume, which would be replete
-with interest and anecdote, but which would require
-the patience and the genius of a Macaulay or a
-Froude for its adequate and comprehensive compilation.
-Cricket may indeed be but a mere pastime, but
-it is a pastime that has come home to the hearts of
-Englishmen, or at least to the hearts of a goodly
-number of Englishmen, during a period of some two
-hundred years. He who would write that history
-must be a man of infinite patience and vast perseverance.
-He will not find cricket history writ large in
-columns of big print, but, for the earlier days at
-least, often packed away in obscure corners of local
-journals. Thirty years ago there was no daily
-sporting paper, while the big “dailies” took but
-little notice of cricket matches. Add a hundred
-years on to the thirty, and only local papers record
-a great match. Consequently, he who would write
-a full and accurate account of the cricket played by
-the counties, must rummage even more painfully<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[192]</a></span>
-than the recorder of political facts, and in journals
-that are far less accessible and that give less prominence
-to the special facts of which the writer is in
-quest. The great work may yet be written, but the
-writing thereof will be largely a labour of love, for
-the divers into cricket lore are but few, and the
-writer will naturally wonder whether the game will
-be worth the candle.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-278.jpg" width="400" height="552" id="i193"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc21" summary="c21">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>J. Lush.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE EARL OF MARCH.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[193]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-279.jpg" width="400" height="242"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER VII</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">AMATEURS AND PROFESSIONALS</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By the <span class="smcap">Hon. R. H. Lyttelton</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">It</span> would not appear to be a difficult task to make a
-clear and accurate definition of the two common
-words found at the head of this chapter. Forty
-years ago the making of such a definition would have
-been easy, and if we could regard things from an
-ideal point of view, it would be easy now. There are,
-however, so many difficulties at present in the way, so
-many changes in the carrying on of the game of
-cricket, so much acquiesced in which formerly would
-not have been dreamt of, that the old boundary line
-has been obliterated&mdash;all is confusion, and in too
-many cases there can hardly be said to be any difference<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[194]</a></span>
-or distinction between the amateur and professional
-in these days in the world of cricket.</p>
-
-<p>It is strange that such should be the case, and it
-is also strange that these difficulties should exist so
-much more in the case of cricket than any other
-game. Whether this always will be the case appears
-to be doubtful. In the case of rowing there seem to
-be dangers ahead, and perhaps in the world of football
-also. But if I am not misinformed, the rowing
-authorities are not troubled in the matter as far as
-this country is concerned. It is owing to the fact
-that in America there do not appear to be the same
-regulations on this vexed question as in England&mdash;and
-the American invasion of England includes the
-chief prizes of Henley as well as the tube railways of
-London. The rowing authorities have a very difficult
-task before them. To come to a right decision,
-and yet not to offend the feelings of a nation we all
-respect, and have every wish to be, from a sporting
-point of view, on good terms with, is by no means
-an easy task, but I can only hope that a satisfactory
-decision will be attained.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket, however, seems to stand altogether on a
-different footing to any other game. The boundary
-line between the two classes of amateurs and professionals
-has become blurred and indistinct, if indeed
-it has not entirely disappeared. As far as I know,
-no such state of things exists in other games, such
-as golf, tennis, football, or billiards. The reason
-why this is so seems to be twofold. The first is
-that if a man wants to play as much cricket as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[195]</a></span>
-he likes he must practically devote five months of the
-year to nothing else. A match takes three days to
-finish, and the whole of each day is taken up by the
-game, and in this respect cricket stands alone. You
-may play golf or tennis every day if you have the
-opportunity; but two or three hours is enough for
-this, and the rest of the time may be spent in the
-counting-house. First-class cricket, however, now is
-of so exacting a nature that it really amounts to this,
-that nearly half the year must be wholly devoted to
-the game, and comparatively few amateurs can afford
-to do this. The other reason is somewhat on a par
-with the experiences of rowing men, and is because
-of the Australian invasion. International cricket
-between this country and Australia has come to stay,
-and it is much to be hoped this will always remain.
-Nothing in cricket is so interesting, and no other
-matches contain so many exciting elements, and in no
-other class of match is such a high standard of skill
-shown. In Australia, however, there does not seem
-to be any very clear distinction between the amateur
-and professional. In 1878, when they first came to
-England, the two Bannermans and, I think, Midwinter
-were classed as professionals, the rest as
-amateurs. In subsequent years there was no distinction
-drawn, and without going too minutely into the
-merits of the case, they are now all called amateurs.
-It may not be obvious what difference this makes
-to English cricket, but nevertheless on more
-than one occasion there has been friction, and it is
-notorious that the bone of contention is to be found<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[196]</a></span>
-in the fact that the English professionals have a
-somewhat well-founded idea in their minds that the
-Australian cricketers are really professionals like
-themselves, and they should in both countries stand
-on the same footing.</p>
-
-<p>It is necessary, however, that some comparison be
-made of the conditions that existed thirty years ago,
-with the state of things now. This is a delicate
-and thorny subject, and it is almost, if not quite, impossible
-to avoid treading on corns; but the matter
-is a critical one for the welfare of the great game,
-and some clear understanding should be arrived at,
-and to attain this the public should know all the facts,
-that they may come to a right opinion.</p>
-
-<p>It has been said that a definition of the words
-amateur and professional forty years ago would have
-been easy, and this is true. The question of money
-for the amateur was purely a personal one for himself.
-He played cricket according to his means. If
-he was of a sufficiently high class, and was qualified
-to play for a leading county, he played on the home
-ground if his business, if he had one, allowed him,
-and if he could not afford railway and hotel fares, he
-did not play the return match, it may be two hundred
-miles away. No doubt there were far fewer
-matches in those days, for Surrey, the chief county
-in the ‘sixties, only played on an average ten or eleven
-matches a year. For an amateur of Surrey to have
-played in all these matches was no doubt a tolerably
-arduous task, but it was not an impossible one. If
-the first-class amateur could not afford to play away<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[197]</a></span>
-from the neighbourhood of his home, he simply
-declined to play. The reason was obvious, but tact
-forbade the cause being inquired into, and the
-amateur was not thought any the worse of on this
-account. No doubt cricket was not in one sense the
-serious thing it is now. There were no carefully
-compiled and intolerably wearisome tables of statistics
-that drown one in these days; nevertheless there was
-just as much keenness for success, but championships
-and records did not constitute the <i>summum bonum</i>;
-it was the genuine sport that was chiefly considered.
-In other words, the game was generally carried on,
-in the best sense, in more of the amateur spirit than
-now, and this notwithstanding the fact that far more
-so-called amateurs play first-class cricket now than
-formerly. There was more cricket in matches of the
-class of Gentlemen of Worcestershire against Gentlemen
-of Warwickshire; the famous touring pure
-amateur clubs, such as Quidnuncs, Harlequins, I
-Zingari, and Free Foresters, played as they do now;
-and there were as many club matches played by the
-M.C.C. and Surrey clubs as were in those days wanted,
-and in these the amateur was able to take his part.</p>
-
-<p>The ambition of every player in these days is to
-reach such a measure of skill as to earn him a place
-in the picked eleven of England against Australia, and
-very properly is this the case. To represent the
-Gentlemen against the Players at Lord’s is still the
-goal of many, but not so much now as it was. For
-a University man a place in his University eleven is as
-keen an object of ambition now as it used to be, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[198]</a></span>
-though the bowling may be weak and the fielding not
-so good as it ought to be, still University cricket is
-the same as it always has been&mdash;the embodiment of
-the purest amateur spirit of the game. But forty
-years ago, to be selected to represent the Gentlemen
-or the Players, as the case might be, set the seal on
-both amateurs and professionals, in the same way as
-to be selected to play for England against Australia
-does now. The amateur came up cheerfully to share
-in the annual defeat that almost invariably awaited
-him; the bowling for most of them was too good, and
-his record, speaking generally, at Lord’s at any rate,
-would be laughed at by the modern critic, stuffed out
-as he is with centuries, statistics, and comparisons, but
-to be selected made him happy.</p>
-
-<p>The reader may now naturally ask, When and how
-does the amateur of forty years ago differ from the
-amateur of the present day? The question will be
-discussed more fully later on, but the answer is
-simply this, that in former times no amateur ever
-received one penny for his services, whether disguised
-under the name of expenses or by the receipts of a
-benefit match, euphemistically called a complimentary
-match. Here at once is the difference, and for the
-present it is sufficient merely to state the fact, and file
-it, as it were, for future reference.</p>
-
-<p>The professional of old was drawn from the same
-sources as he is now. He comes from the shop,
-from the factory, from the pit, and from the slum.
-He had by no means so much cricket as he has now
-in the way of first-class county matches, but he filled<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[199]</a></span>
-up his time, if he arrived at a certain height of skill,
-by playing a series of touring matches against local
-twenty-twos, and these matches, if they did nothing
-else, gave an impetus to local cricket. There can
-be no doubt, however, that an enormous change has
-taken place in the type of professional cricketer. The
-first-class modern player moves altogether in a higher
-plane. He earns far more money in populous centres,
-such as Bradford, London, and Manchester. He has
-been known to clear £2000 and more by a benefit
-match. A spectator coming on to Lord’s at five
-o’clock in the afternoon, during the annual match
-between Gentlemen and Players, might easily for a
-moment be uncertain which side were fielding. There
-could have been no mistake in old days. Older
-cricketers well remember Jemmy Grundy in an old
-velvet cap more fitted for the North Pole than an
-English cricket ground, such a cap as a poacher would
-wear. You can see prints of Hayward and Carpenter
-in spotted shirts and large belts and ties, and Jemmy
-Shaw bowling his hardest in a yellow shirt that did
-duty apparently for the whole summer. Now, without
-any disrespect to the amateurs, the professional is
-as smartly dressed as his opponents. He is clad in
-spotless white; he is smart; and, in fact, as far as
-appearance goes, he is an amateur, and good at that.
-Two reasons may be given for this. In the first place,
-he is more highly paid; in the next place, the great
-number of county matches brings him more frequently
-into contact with amateurs; and it is also true that
-county committees look more closely after the players<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[200]</a></span>
-than they did. The life of a professional is a very
-hard life in the way of work, and though a sound
-batsman, who is of steady habits, like poor Shrewsbury,
-can play for a long while, the fast bowlers are overweighted
-with the constant labour of bowling on too
-perfect wickets, and they cannot keep their pace and
-skill for much more than six or seven years.</p>
-
-<p>The professionals who are not good enough to
-play for a first-class county have by no means so
-good a time. They get engaged by clubs such as
-are found all over South Lancashire and in the West
-Riding of York, and they bowl for several hours all
-the week to members of the club at the nets, and on
-Saturdays play for the club in league matches. The
-results of these matches are tabulated in the local
-newspapers and in the sporting papers published on
-Sundays, and in their own district cause no end of
-excitement. The end of the season finds one of these
-clubs champion of the local league; and cricket is
-carried on very much like football in this respect.
-There are senior and junior leagues, there are
-Pleasant Sunday afternoon leagues, and in each of
-them there exists a carefully considered system of
-tables and elaborately calculated records of averages,
-and the leading cricketers, like the leading football
-players, are heroes. The game, however, as played in
-such matches, is of a distinctly lower type, and if
-report speaks truly, the umpires have often more than
-their proper share in determining the issue of the
-match. The professional supplements his income in
-other ways. He generally supplies bats and balls and
-other cricket materials, and sometimes, if he is a man
-of business, he establishes himself finally in a shop,
-more frequently in a public-house, and settles down
-for life.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-287.jpg" width="400" height="582" id="i200"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc22" summary="c22">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdc"><i>MR. J. H. DARK.</i><br />
- (<i>Proprietor of Lords</i>)<br />
- <i>GWM. HILLYER</i></td>
-
- <td class="tdc"><i>THE UMPIRE.</i><br />
- (<i>Wm. Caldecourt</i>)<br />
- <i>WM. MARTINGELL</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-288.jpg" width="400" height="554" id="i201"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"> <i>FULLER PILCH</i>,</p>
- <p class="pcapn"><i>Who was considered, till the days of Dr. W. G. Grace, the best Batsman
-that had ever appeared</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[201]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The descriptions of the amateur and professional
-as given above are accurate enough, and many of us
-who can remember the former state of things probably
-think that, in comparing the epoch of 1860 to 1870
-with that of 1892 to 1902, the condition of things
-was better, as far as the amateur is concerned, in the
-‘sixties, and worse for the professional, and that
-now the position is exactly reversed. An amateur
-should be either one thing or the other, but nobody
-can say in these days what he is. The change has
-taken place gradually, and began from causes that
-sprang into existence perhaps thirty years ago, and
-these we will now try to explain.</p>
-
-<p>Nobody who has watched the game carefully can
-fail to be struck with the wonderful development of
-county cricket. The ideal county cricket really
-exists, speaking of first-class counties alone, in the
-three counties of Nottingham, Yorkshire, and, we
-think, Derbyshire. Regarded impartially, a county
-ought to be represented solely by county players, but
-as a matter of fact this is not the case anywhere but
-in Nottingham and Yorkshire. But in many counties
-are to be found gentlemen who like to have first-class
-cricket in their county, and a county cricket club is
-founded. The financial prosperity of the club depends
-in a great measure on the success of the county eleven,
-and if a county has three or four amateurs who<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[202]</a></span>
-materially strengthen the side, the committee make
-great efforts to secure their services all through the
-season. The natural result follows. The amateur
-is driven to confess that he cannot afford the expenses
-of travelling and living at hotels, and he must decline
-to play. The winning of matches being the golden
-key to financial prosperity, the committees have been
-driven to adopt a system of paying the amateur money,
-that their counties may play their best elevens, and
-the first step in obliterating the boundary line that
-should exist between the amateur and professional has
-been taken, and what thirty years ago was done in
-one or two instances is now a matter of universal
-practice.</p>
-
-<p>I am now for the moment making no comment;
-only stating a fact. As far as the balance-sheet of
-the county club is concerned, you cannot assume
-that the club can run its eleven cheaply by playing
-amateurs, who in truth cost the committee as much
-per head as the professionals. It would involve too
-much worrying into detail, and might lead to other
-harmful consequences, to get exact statements of the
-cost of railway tickets, etc.; so there is a fixed payment
-in a majority of cases given to every amateur,
-and this fixed payment is on a sufficiently generous
-scale to enable many an impecunious amateur to
-devote his services to his county. Nor is this the
-only way of providing livelihoods for skilful amateurs.
-There has to be, of course, a secretary, and you can
-either appoint a cricketer to this post, and provide him
-with a clerk who can do the work while his employer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[203]</a></span>
-is playing cricket, or else make the cricketer an
-under-secretary, both posts, of course, having a salary
-attached.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> It is also, if report speaks truly, a matter
-of fairly common practice for employers somehow or
-other to find some employment for cricketers during
-the winter, of course at a salary, and it has therefore
-come to this, that many an amateur has found in the
-game of cricket a means of access to a livelihood.
-No distinction has yet been given between a complimentary
-match and a benefit; the result is much the
-same in both instances; the proceeds of gate-money,
-after deduction of expenses, are handed to the player
-for whom the match is played.</p>
-
-<p>A short time ago there was a proposal, emanating,
-if I am not mistaken, from the Australian authorities,
-that the M.C.C. should undertake the arranging and
-selection of an English eleven to represent this
-country in a series of matches in Australia. The
-committee of the M.C.C. undertook the task, though
-not, it must be confessed, in a very sanguine spirit.
-Their labours did not last long. Difficulties met
-them on the very threshold, and these difficulties
-were entirely on the ground of the amateurs’ expenses.
-Now it must be assumed that, if the principle of
-paying amateurs’ expenses be allowed, there ought to
-be no difficulty in the way of settling with amateurs.
-A manager has to go out; why should not he
-take all the tickets, pay the coaching and railway
-expenses and hotel bills, receive the proper share of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[204]</a></span>
-the gate-money, and deliver the amateur safe back in
-his own country without the payment to the amateur
-of a penny? The word expenses has a well-defined
-and proper meaning, known to everybody. It represents
-the actual cost to a player of living, travelling,
-and playing, from the moment he leaves this country
-to the moment he sets foot in it again; but it is
-perfectly certain that, if left to the amateur to make
-a sort of private bargain, other and improper developments
-will take place, and it is notorious that they
-do.</p>
-
-<p>Now let us consider for a moment the position
-of affairs, as far as this question of amateurs and
-professionals is concerned, in the case of Australia.
-As was said before, there was some sort of discrimination
-between the two in the first Colonial eleven in
-1878. Both the Bannermans, as noted above, were
-avowedly professionals, and Midwinter also, if I
-remember rightly, and perhaps one or two others.
-But the bulk were amateurs, and the mystic sign
-“Mr.” was placed before their names. If no authoritative
-statement is made, and no balance-sheet made
-public, nobody can be surprised if the facts are more
-or less conjectural. But for all that, rumour in this
-instance is no lying jade, and without fear of contradiction,
-I assert that many of the so-called Australian
-“amateurs” who have been to this country have
-made money over and above their expenses.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> Let
-nobody be misled, or assume from this that any stigma<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[205]</a></span>
-attaches to any of these Australian players; it is not
-their fault, but some may complain of the system. The
-profession of a cricketer, the calling of a professional,
-is in every way an honourable and good one. What
-puzzles so many of us is that, this being the case, so
-many should adopt the profession, but deny the name.
-They seem to prefer the ambiguous position of a so-called
-amateur to the straightforward, far more honourable
-one of a professional. This is not the case in other
-professions. Take the case of the dramatic career.
-There are many actors and actresses of more or less
-high social standing who have been driven by their
-love of the work and skill to adopt the calling of an
-actor. There is no ambiguity about it. They
-become what they are. They do not call themselves
-amateurs and receive salaries under the guise of
-expenses, which is exactly what cricketers do; and
-many of us ask ourselves, what is the reason of
-this?</p>
-
-<p>To this question all that can be said is that circumstances
-have so changed that what was easy to define
-formerly is difficult now. It may be impossible to
-have the same rules and regulations now that used to
-exist forty years ago. But even if this is true, there
-can be no doubt that in these days a most unhealthy
-state of things prevails. It is bad for the nominal
-amateur, it is bad for the game, and it is bad for the
-country. Cricket is the finest game ever invented,
-but it is after all only a game, and it is wrong that
-things should have developed in such a way that
-amateurs become professionals in all but the name,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[206]</a></span>
-and that gate-money should be the real moving spirit
-and ideal of all county clubs. To be prosperous
-financially a county must win matches, to win matches
-you must get the best possible county eleven, therefore
-the best amateurs as well as professionals must
-be played; and if these amateurs cannot afford the
-time and the money to play, why, then, they must be
-paid, and paid accordingly they are. That this is the
-case now everybody knows, and it seems strange that
-the greatest game of the world should be the one
-game where such things occur. No complaint need
-be made of the Australian system, except in this,
-that players who are in fact professionals should
-be treated as such. We are always glad to give
-them every welcome and show them every hospitality;
-nevertheless, they should have the same
-treatment and stand on the same footing that our
-professionals do when they visit Australia. In the
-same way, if any player feels himself unable, at the
-invitation of the M.C.C., to go out to Australia,
-because he is only offered the payment of the
-actual cost of travelling and living, and afterwards
-goes out under some private arrangement, he
-should be treated and recognised as a professional.
-It is an old proverb that you cannot eat your
-cake and have it, and if the modern amateur
-does not care, on social grounds, to become a
-professional, then let him honestly refuse to play
-cricket if he cannot afford to play on receipt of his
-bare expenses only. Richard Daft, in old days, found
-himself in the same dilemma, and grasped the nettle<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[207]</a></span>
-and became a professional, and justly earned the
-respect of all for so doing.</p>
-
-<p>Put briefly, in these days the state of things is this.
-A large number of amateurs directly and indirectly
-make something of a livelihood by cricket, and yet
-they are recognised as amateurs. Such cricketers
-are those who, under the guise of expenses, get
-such a sum that after paying these expenses leaves
-something to be carried over, as Mr. Jorrocks
-called it. A few others do things on a far more
-lordly scale. They have complimentary matches
-given them by their counties; in other words,
-they have benefits like many of the leading and
-deserving professionals, but still they are called
-amateurs; and whether it is correct to call a class
-of men one name, when they are obviously and
-openly something different, is perhaps a matter of
-opinion, but for my part I do not hesitate to say it
-is neither right nor straightforward.</p>
-
-<p>Further trouble arises from the curse of gate-money.
-This hangs like a blight over everything.
-County clubs dare not take a decided line about
-cricket reform, lest a shortening of the game might
-diminish the gate-money, and professionals do not speak
-out because they are forced to bow the knee to Baal.
-County clubs are therefore in this position: they
-must attract gates; to do this they must have a fine
-eleven; to get a fine eleven they must have amateurs,
-and these amateurs cannot play regularly without
-being paid, and so paid they are. The expenses of
-running a first-class county eleven are therefore very<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[208]</a></span>
-great&mdash;so great, in fact, that few can stand the strain.
-Some years ago we used to have three or four wet
-seasons running occasionally. If ever this occurs
-again, bankruptcy awaits several county committees,
-as Warwickshire and Worcestershire have some
-reason from last season’s experience to dread. It
-now costs as much to run a team of amateurs as
-professionals, as all have to be paid. Perhaps some
-day, when the public get tired of seeing match after
-match unfinished, and refuse to pay their entrance
-money, and the cricket world find out that some
-reform is necessary, and the duration of a match is
-two days and not three, county clubs will find out
-that they cannot pay these wages for amateurs, and
-a remedy will be found from an unlooked-for cause.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-297.jpg" width="400" height="562" id="i208"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc23" summary="c23">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>Attributed to</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Thos. Gainsborough, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>PORTRAIT OF A YOUTH.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>Said to be of George, Prince of Wales, afterwards George IV.</i>)</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-298.jpg" width="400" height="550" id="i209"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>WILLIAM DORRINTON.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[209]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Having thus given vent to a growl on an unpleasant
-subject, the features of professional and
-amateur play may now be discussed. There used to
-be great differences in old days, far more than there
-is now, but in one respect there is a great difference
-still, and that is in bowling. We all know what
-sort of bowling will be seen in a University match,
-or in Free Forester and Quidnunc matches. There
-will be one or two fair slow bowlers, but that is all.
-Good fast bowling has not been seen for some years
-in amateur elevens, but for this the amateurs are
-hardly to blame. The modern wicket, shaved and
-heavy rolled, has made it practically impossible for
-any really fast bowler to do any good, unless he is
-one of the shining lights, like Richardson or Lockwood.
-Amateurs like Messrs. Jessop, Kortright,
-and Bradley have an occasional day of success, but
-these bowlers, being naturally fast, depend mainly for
-their success on the agility of the field in the slips,
-and on their capacity to make the ball bump. To
-attain this they generally have but a short career.
-They take out of themselves by adopting a gigantic
-long run and banging the ball down from straight
-over their head at a terrific pace. Flesh and blood
-cannot stand this for more than a short time. A
-human being is but human after all; he is not a
-machine built to order like a steam engine, and work
-like what he has to undergo knocks him up. The
-professionals have always had much the best of it as
-regards bowling, and they have so still; but why this
-is so is not easy to see. Between the ages of twelve
-and eighteen there is no reason to suppose that the
-professional practises more at bowling than the amateur;
-the probability is the other way. A young
-amateur is at school during this period, where cricket
-is more systematically carried on than at the board
-school, which the professional leaves at thirteen and
-exchanges for a shop or a factory. But the tendency
-in amateur bowlers is to promise well as a boy, and
-not to come up to expectations as a man, and especially
-is this the case when, as so often happens, there
-is a corresponding improvement in batting.</p>
-
-<p>In my experience of more than thirty years, the
-only instance I can call to mind of an amateur who
-bowled above medium pace like a professional&mdash;that
-is to say, with a professional’s accuracy and method&mdash;was
-Mr. Appleby, who died last year. Mr. Appleby<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[210]</a></span>
-had a beautiful easy action, and was always to be
-relied on to keep a length and direction, as J. T.
-Hearne did for many years. Mr. Jackson is still
-in the middle of his career, and next to Mr. Appleby,
-bowls more nearly approaching to the professional
-standpoint; but, good bowler as he is, he does not
-strike one as quite like a professional bowler. Slow
-bowlers are not quite in the same class. Here the
-amateur is more at home. Mr. W. G. Grace and
-the late Mr. David Buchanan were worthy of being
-classed with Alfred Shaw, Peate, and Rhodes. Mr.
-Grace must be so much used to hearing his merits
-discussed entirely from the batting point of view,
-and has done so little bowling as compared with
-batting, that it may interest the present generation
-that for some years as a bowler he was as effective
-as the best professional. His method, however,
-was very different. At a time when a wicket was
-supposed to be worth only ten runs, and when nearly
-every bowler bowled more for maidens than they do
-now, Mr. Grace was the first to show the way of a
-deliberate system of getting wickets by getting men
-out, other than by merely bowling them. He
-habitually placed a deep square leg in the right
-place, and tempted men like Oscroft, Charlwood, and
-many more to send chances there, and many a time
-and oft has the trick come off. He frequently
-bowled in a way that showed what idea was in his
-head. A very common device of his was in regard
-to l.b.w. He never objected to being hit over the
-ropes, as he would silently argue that an ordinary<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[211]</a></span>
-batsman, having once tasted the sweets of a mighty
-leg hit over the ropes, would very much like to
-repeat the feat, and Mr. Grace would drop down a
-tempting ball on the leg stump, and if, as often
-happened, the batsman did hit at it and did miss it,
-he was out l.b.w. To this day, to batsmen like those
-who come from Australia for the first time, and have
-therefore never seen Mr. Grace bowl, I would as
-soon put on Mr. Grace to bowl for a few overs as
-any man in England. He is and always has been
-quite unlike any other bowler, both in the way he
-delivered the ball and the strange way he placed
-his field.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Buchanan was another bowler who copied
-Mr. Grace in one sense, for though he did not bowl
-for catches to leg, he carried out the theory of
-bowling for catches on the off side more than any
-bowler before or since. A bold hitter might hit
-Mr. Buchanan, if he was quick on his feet and had
-a good eye, but for all that there were few bowlers
-who so rarely bowled a bad-length ball. Neither
-were there many bowlers who made such absolute
-fools of batsmen as Mr. Buchanan did. The picked
-professionals who played against him in Gentlemen
-and Players matches at Lord’s and the Oval as a
-rule displayed all the feebleness that was possible.
-Daft, Lockwood, and Oscroft were exceptions to
-this. Lockwood, who had a wonderful cut, more
-than any other, realised the danger of hitting at the
-pitch of Mr. Buchanan’s off ball. Instead of doing
-this, he got back and cut the ball behind the wicket<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[212]</a></span>
-for three runs&mdash;it might have been four, but
-Lockwood was a slow runner. Mr. Buchanan did
-not like to have a third man, and his nervous system
-was seriously insulted at Lockwood’s method, which
-forced him to change the disposition of his field in a
-way he did not like. Mr. Grace and Mr. Buchanan
-were two amateur slow bowlers who really studied
-the art of bowling, and both of them, Mr. Grace
-in particular, studied the play of their batting
-opponents; but when you have mentioned Messrs.
-Appleby, Grace, and Buchanan, and for a short time
-Mr. Steel, you have nearly exhausted the list of
-bowlers who during the last thirty years may be said
-to have challenged comparison with the best professionals.</p>
-
-<p>In batting it is very different. Mr. Grace, of
-course, must be left out of any calculation. Apart
-from him, however, the amateurs can quite hold
-their own in batting. It is not fair to take as an
-illustration the performances of each in Gentlemen <i>v.</i>
-Players matches, because the bowling on one side is
-so superior to the other. But in international test
-matches, both here and in Australia, Messrs.
-Stoddart, Ranjitsinhji, Maclaren, Jackson, and Steel
-have been fully as good and successful as Shrewsbury,
-Barnes, Gunn, Hayward, and Tyldesley. As far as
-style is concerned, the older professionals, such as
-Shrewsbury and Barnes, had a more distinctive
-difference of method than their modern successors.
-Hayward and Tyldesley far more closely resembled
-the amateur method of Messrs. Jackson and Palairet<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[213]</a></span>
-than Shrewsbury and Barnes did that of Messrs. Steel
-and Stoddart. It is not easy to explain on paper the
-difference, but every decent judge of the game could
-see that a difference was there. Some of the players,
-like Ulyett and Bates, could and did hit as hard
-and as often as the amateur, but in the professional
-there was little real grace of style. It is strange that
-this is so, for grace and ease are qualities that must be
-born, not made, but it is true, nevertheless, speaking
-of the older cricketers. Nowadays it would seem
-that Tyldesley and Hayward have nothing to fear, as
-far as style is concerned, from any amateur, always
-excepting Mr. Palairet. As far as mere run-getting
-is the point of discussion, there would seem to be
-very little in it one way or the other. In the great
-series of test matches, both here and in Australia,
-during the last ten years there have been Stoddart,
-Maclaren, Ranjitsinhji, and Jackson, as there have
-been Shrewsbury, Hayward, Tyldesley, and Gunn,
-the amateurs perhaps having a shade the better
-of it.</p>
-
-<p>The fielding also is and always has been tolerably
-even. In this, however, there is a great difference
-now as compared with old times. Thirty years ago
-the professional wicket-keeper was a class, even two
-classes, above the amateur. Lockyer, Pooley,
-Plumb, and Pinder formed a class that the amateurs
-could not show any comparison with. Possibly the
-rougher wicket and the, generally speaking, faster
-bowling made the position more unpleasant than it
-is now, but undoubtedly the amateur has improved<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[214]</a></span>
-beyond all knowledge in wicket-keeping, and there
-is not much to choose now. In other respects also
-the quality seems tolerably equal. The observer
-will undoubtedly notice a change in the figure of the
-ordinary professional now. The old Yorkshire
-eleven, with the well-known figures of Roger Iddison,
-Luke Greenwood, and Rowbotham, and the Nottingham
-eleven with Bignall and Wild, seem quite out
-of date now, though Hirst looks promising in this
-respect. But Gunn, Maurice Read, Tyldesley,
-Wainwright, Hirst, Braund, and several others were
-and are fully equal in fielding to any that the
-amateurs can bring to compare with them.</p>
-
-<p>It would appear, then, that in batting and fielding
-there is little to choose between amateurs and
-professionals, but in bowling there is great superiority
-among the professionals. Of course this superiority,
-<i>cæteris paribus</i>, is so important that as long as it
-exists the professional must win the vast majority of
-matches. As a general rule this has been the case,
-but when Mr. Grace was in his prime, that is,
-between 1869 and about 1887, his tremendous skill
-gave the amateurs the predominance that, as far as
-appearances go, does not look likely to occur again.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-305.jpg" width="400" height="551" id="i214"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc24" summary="c24">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>W. Bromley.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>GEORGE PARR.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[215]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Some good judges of the game have maintained
-that the common practice, which has prevailed for
-some time, of engaging professional bowlers to
-bowl to boys at school and undergraduates at the
-universities, and to the amateurs generally belonging
-to clubs, is a bad one, and that amateur
-inferiority in bowling is to be traced to this custom.
-Something no doubt may be done by practising
-bowling, but it is probable that the bowler even
-more than the batsman is <i>nascitur non fit</i>. Unless
-there is a natural break and some spin or mysterious
-quality which makes the ball hang or kick in a
-bowler, he can hardly acquire it. The utmost he
-can attain to, if he does not possess these virtues, is
-experience in estimating the quality of his opponents,
-and a modicum of skill in varying length and pace.
-But these will not avail him much if the natural gifts
-of a bowler are not in him by nature. Even these
-will go if, as frequently happens in these days of
-easy wickets, the bowler gets too much work thrown
-on him, for the cricket life of a very fast bowler is
-not more than six years on the average.</p>
-
-<p>In the matter of generalship, or the managing of
-a side, professionals have hitherto shown very little
-skill. The professionals themselves would probably
-prefer to be led by an amateur. George Parr, Daft,
-Emmett, Alfred Shaw, and Abel have at different
-times acted as captains, but none are to be compared
-to Messrs. V. E. Walker, A. N. Hornby, J. Shuter,
-and Maclaren. A professional who is captain seems
-always to think it proper to give every bowler a
-chance, whether a change of bowling is wanted or
-not, and a natural bias towards members of his own
-county is not always successfully resisted.</p>
-
-<p>From what has been said in this chapter, the
-reader will be able to learn that, as far as England is
-concerned, the relations between amateurs and professionals
-stand on an altogether different footing in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[216]</a></span>
-cricket from what they do in other games. In
-Australia, unless we have been misinformed, most
-if not all the players who come to this country
-earn, on an average of years, a fairly substantial
-sum by cricket played over here. They are really
-professionals, and it is probable that in their own
-country they are so regarded. If this is so, we have
-the curious fact of a totally different standard
-prevailing in the two countries. But this, as far as
-England is concerned, is not important. What is
-important is that there should be some distinct
-understanding on the subject, and the present
-nebulous state of things put an end to. If it is
-necessary to have something paid to amateurs, the
-greatest care should be taken that nothing beyond
-<i>bona fide</i> expenses are paid, and we believe that by
-the Surrey club this is done now. Not until there
-is established some clear and understood principle
-under which a true definition of the word “amateur”
-is arrived at, will the present unsatisfactory state
-of things be put an end to, and it is earnestly to
-be hoped that some day this will be done.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[217]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-309.jpg" width="400" height="253"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER VIII</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">EARLIER AUSTRALIAN CRICKET</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By the <span class="smcap">Earl of Darnley</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">The</span> rivalry between English and Australian
-cricketers, which has been productive in recent times
-of so many splendid matches, can now look back to
-its starting-point through quite a respectably large
-number of years.</p>
-
-<p>In the year 1861 H. H. Stephenson captained the
-first English team of cricketers which visited
-Australia, and it was seventeen years later before the
-seeds then sown had sufficiently matured to allow the
-Australians to feel full confidence in their powers to
-return the compliment, and to try conclusions with
-English players on their own grounds.</p>
-
-<p>Between these dates, 1861 and 1878, three other
-English elevens visited Australia&mdash;G. Parr’s in 1863,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[218]</a></span>
-W. G. Grace’s in 1873, and J. Lillywhite’s in 1876.
-Of these four elevens, three were almost wholly made
-up of professional players, and the fourth, that
-captained by “W. G.,” included five amateurs.
-Amongst their numbers, however, they included
-most of the great players of the day, and the first
-and second elevens in point of date each left behind
-in Australia one of its members, whose coaching was
-invaluable to the rising generation of Colonial players:
-these two instructors were C. Lawrence, who remained
-from the first English eleven, and W. Caffyn,
-about the best all-round man of his time, from the
-second. Many times has the writer heard striking
-testimony offered in Australia to the invaluable help
-given by these two cricketers in those early days,
-and certainly they might well have felt proud of the
-aptitude of such of their pupils as have come to us
-from 1878 onwards.</p>
-
-<p>The matches in these first four English visits have
-no very special points of interest, as they were almost
-invariably played against considerable odds. It was,
-however, plain to all that the standard of cricket in
-Australia was greatly improving year by year, and
-no one was surprised when it was announced in 1878
-that our friends felt themselves strong enough to
-send their first eleven to England, to try their
-fortunes on level terms. So many Australian elevens
-have come and gone since then, that it is difficult
-now to imagine the intense interest and excitement
-which was felt in English cricket circles at this
-epoch-making event. The arrival of an eleven<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[219]</a></span>
-which might hold its own against our best men was
-up to this time so wildly improbable an eventuality,
-that the majority of the English cricketing public
-could hardly be brought to believe in its possibility.</p>
-
-<p>A very short time sufficed to show that there was
-no mistake about the capacity of our visitors for
-holding their own with our best men on even terms.
-After a moderate start at Nottingham, where the
-county won by one innings and a few runs, came
-perhaps the most startlingly dramatic match ever
-played by an Australian eleven in England, against
-a strong selection of the Marylebone Club, including
-such well-known performers as W. G. Grace, Hornby,
-Ridley, A. J. Webbe, A. Shaw, and Morley. To
-dispose of such a side for 33 and 19, and win the
-match by nine wickets in one day, was a feat that
-even the warmest admirers of the Australians had
-hardly imagined, and from that memorable day may
-be said to have begun that intensely keen and
-interesting rivalry that has lasted right up to the
-present day.</p>
-
-<p>It may be worth while to attempt some slight
-personal sketch of this remarkable 1878 Australian
-eleven, which included several players who were to
-be the backbone of future elevens, and which achieved
-its successes in some measure by methods to which
-we in England were as yet strangers.</p>
-
-<p>On looking through their batting list, there are
-names which suggest plentiful run-getting capabilities.
-As a matter of fact, however, at that time the batting
-was, with one exception, C. Bannerman, of the most<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[220]</a></span>
-rugged and unfinished description. The above-named
-exception, Bannerman, might well have been
-given a high place among contemporary batsmen as a
-fierce-hitting, powerful player, worthy of any eleven
-for batting alone, but Blackham, Midwinter, Horan,
-Murdoch, A. Bannerman, and Garrett had none of
-them yet acquired the powers which in after years
-were to be theirs in such abundant measure, and the
-batting of the whole side, after C. Bannerman, was
-distinctly of the rough, useful order. In this connection
-it may be noticed, however, that although finish
-was to be looked for in vain, even at this early
-stage was evident that fearless and dogged resistance
-to adverse circumstances which has since then successfully
-extricated many an Australian side from a
-tight place, and has always given their adversaries
-that uncomfortable feeling of never being quite
-certain that they have really got them safely beaten.
-What an invaluable asset is a reputation of this sort,
-and how well and consistently have our Australian
-friends sustained this hardly-earned character!</p>
-
-<p>Emphatically this was a bowling and fielding
-eleven. In nineteen eleven-a-side matches, only twice
-was the 250 exceeded by their opponents, a convincing
-record that speaks for itself. Of the four
-bowlers, one great name stands out supreme, and who
-is there that remembers that year and the ten or
-twelve that succeeded it, but must confess that his
-whole ideas of bowling were revolutionised by what
-he saw of Spofforth in the prime of his powers?
-With physical qualifications admirably adapted to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[221]</a></span>
-fast bowling, very tall, long-limbed, active, wiry, and
-impossible to tire, Spofforth had scientifically studied
-the art of bowling to a most unusual degree. The
-hard, true wickets in Australia had even then begun
-to exercise a decisive influence on the characteristics
-of bowling in that country, and unless a bowler
-could develop quite exceptional powers of deception,
-spin, and break, he was soon reduced to absolute
-helplessness. This difference in climate may be said
-to be the one element which makes a distinction
-between cricket as played in the Colonies and cricket
-as played in England, and, while its influence has
-been decisive in keeping up the standard of Australian
-bowling to a very high pitch of excellence, it has been
-at the same time hardly less favourable to the formation
-of a free and good style of batting, a style far
-more difficult to acquire when the ground is unreliable
-and the climate variable.</p>
-
-<p>At that time Spofforth’s methods varied considerably
-from those which he afterwards employed. He
-was then as a rule a fast, sometimes terrifically fast,
-bowler, with occasional slow ones, the change of
-pace being most admirably masked in the delivery.
-In after years his average pace was rather over
-medium, with an unusually big break back for that
-pace, while the very fast or very slow ones were the
-exception and not the rule. In addition to these
-types of ball, no man ever bowled a more dangerous
-fast yorker than Spofforth, and his armoury may well
-be said to have contained as damaging a collection of
-weapons as ever taxed the powers of an opposing batsman.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[222]</a></span>
-Boyle, Allan, and Garrett made up the bowling
-strength. Of these Allan, partly probably through
-being the possessor of a constitution which suffered
-greatly from the severities of our summer climate,
-never came out in his true form; his bowling had a
-fine natural break, and swerved considerably in the
-air, and, although not on the whole very successful,
-he occasionally showed quite enough of his powers to
-warrant the great reputation enjoyed by him in the
-Colonies. Both Boyle and Garrett were extremely
-useful bowlers of the good-length-lasting style, which
-carried them through many subsequent years of good
-performance.</p>
-
-<p>In wicket-keeping again did English cricketers
-find that there was something new to be learnt.
-Both Blackham and Murdoch showed for the first
-time how perfectly possible it was to stand up to the
-fastest bowling without a long-stop; and Blackham
-especially gave promise of powers that were to make
-him for some years perhaps the most brilliant wicket-keeper
-ever seen.</p>
-
-<p>The fielding all round and throwing were unusually
-good, and climate again may probably be answerable
-for the fact that Australian elevens, taken all through,
-could almost invariably out-throw any English eleven
-man for man.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-315.jpg" width="400" height="541" id="i222"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>THOMAS BOX.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[223]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>From this short description it will easily be seen
-that they were a team to be seriously reckoned with,
-whoever their opponents might be, and when we
-look to the completed records of their matches, the
-result must be held to be decidedly creditable. By
-comparison with the programmes of after years,
-the relative test of their powers can hardly be said
-to be so severe. No really representative English
-eleven was encountered, although the full strength of
-both the amateurs and the professionals was played
-separately. At the hands of the Gentlemen they met
-with one of their heaviest reverses, but the professionals
-were narrowly defeated once, while the other
-game ended in a fairly even draw.</p>
-
-<p>Nineteen matches played, of which the Australians
-won ten and lost four, made up a highly satisfactory
-total, and, in addition, only three out of twenty-one
-matches against odds were lost by them.</p>
-
-<p>It was not a batsman’s year, 1878, but even
-taking that fact into consideration, only one innings
-of over 100 hit against Australian bowling shows
-unmistakably wherein lay the chief strength of the
-eleven. Mention has already been made of the
-remarkable wicket-keeping of Murdoch and Blackham,
-who for the first time in English cricket performed
-their duties without the aid of a long-stop.
-We think we are right in saying that Murdoch was
-at first looked upon as the regular wicket-keeper of
-the team, but from that time onward the wonderful
-talent of Blackham gained for him the superior position,
-and his wicket-keeping for several years was at
-least the equal of that of any other competitor that
-could be brought against him. Standing very close
-to the wicket, and of marvellous quickness, he had
-the happy knack of invariably showing at his best
-on great occasions; a batsman too of a resolute, fearless<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[224]</a></span>
-description, and a very quick runner between
-wickets, his play in Australian elevens for many
-years was no small factor in their success.</p>
-
-<p>The composition of this eleven is of especial
-interest, not merely because it was the first of the
-series to come to us, but by reason of its including
-some prominent names of men who were to be the
-nucleus and backbone of those that were to follow.
-Blackham, Murdoch, A. Bannerman, Garrett, Boyle,
-and Spofforth are names that will frequently recur in
-following years, and we shall see how, with their
-help, the standard of success rose consistently through
-the tours of 1880 and 1882, and then, after a slight
-falling-off in 1884, for reasons which will afterwards
-be alluded to, fell gradually away until a revival set
-in about the time of Stoddart’s first tour in Australia
-in 1894.</p>
-
-<p>The next event of any prominence to be noticed
-is the visit of Lord Harris’s eleven to Australia in the
-winter of this same year 1878. A fine batting and
-fielding eleven, but hardly strong enough in bowling
-to be really representative of English cricket at its
-best. Emmett and Ulyett were the only two professionals
-included, and for a side so weak in bowling,
-they may be said to have made an excellent appearance.
-One match only was played against the
-returned Australian eleven, who were successful by
-ten wickets. Four new names appear amongst those
-chosen to represent the various Australian sides, all
-more or less successful, Palmer, Macdonnell, Massie,
-and Evans. The last-named cricketer was about that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[225]</a></span>
-time at his best, and many and outspoken have been
-the regrets that this fine cricketer could never spare the
-time to appear much in English <i>v.</i> Australian cricket
-until he was well past his prime. In both appearance
-and performance he was thoroughly typical of the
-highest class of colonial cricketer. His tall, unusually
-active, well-built figure, bearded, bronzed bushman’s
-face, presented the most perfect example of the
-Australian athlete, while his overhand accurate bowling
-and really splendid fielding and steady batting
-made him a worthy addition to any eleven.</p>
-
-<p>Against the representatives of the individual
-colonies the Englishmen more than held their own,
-and six matches won to three lost make up a highly
-creditable record.</p>
-
-<p>In the summer of 1880 appeared the second
-Australian eleven, and amongst their number several
-additional names to those who were with us in 1878.</p>
-
-<p>Palmer, whose performance against Lord Harris’s
-eleven made his inclusion a certainty, appears for the
-first time, and he has more than justified his selection
-by coming out top of the bowling averages in eleven-a-side
-matches, according to number of wickets taken,
-although Spofforth, who was unable to play in several
-matches, has the lesser average of runs per wicket.
-No prettier bowler to look at than Palmer ever
-bowled a ball; a style of delivery that apparently
-cost its owner no effort whatever, and, as usual with
-great Australian bowlers, a much greater break than
-the pace of the ball would lead you to suspect.
-Strong and sturdily built, his power of bowling a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[226]</a></span>
-very fast yorker was unusually great, and was
-frequently used early in a batsman’s innings with
-deadly effect. With such an easy delivery, it is
-not easy to see why Palmer’s successes did not
-continue for much longer than they actually did,
-but we may probably look for the explanation
-in a too great fondness which he subsequently
-developed for the fast leg breaks, which first destroyed
-the excellent length for which he was famous,
-and finally lowered the standard of his bowling
-altogether. The great improvement in his batting
-powers may possibly also in his case, as in that of
-many other bowlers, have had something to do with
-it. His style in batting was almost as attractively
-graceful as that of his bowling, but lacked something
-of that tenacity which must be added to style to
-bring about the real power over the bowlers characteristic
-of a great batsman.</p>
-
-<p>The name of Macdonnell recalls many a dashing,
-vigorous innings, perhaps some of the most fascinating
-displays of hard, but not usually high, hitting
-ever seen. This season of 1880 saw him already
-among the leading batsmen, with an average in
-eleven-a-side matches second only to Murdoch, whose
-immense improvement as a bat deserves separate
-mention. Macdonnell belongs to that small circle
-of Australian players who were able by the fierceness
-of their hitting to practically win a match by their
-own unaided efforts when their companions were
-comparatively helpless, and this type of batsman,
-which was one of the chief features of every<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[227]</a></span>
-Australian eleven up to 1893, seems, curiously
-enough, to have almost disappeared. We may not
-improbably be able to trace this to the great predominant
-influence which has altered the whole
-character of modern cricket, and, in the judgment
-of many, brought about a dull level of too easily
-performed feats of run-getting, that only drastic
-legislation can alter, viz. the increasing excellence of
-the artificially prepared wickets. The value of an
-exceptional hitter, such as any member of the little
-band above alluded to, is far greater when the
-conditions are difficult. He alone perhaps can offer
-any effective resistance when the bowler is revelling
-in favourable conditions; but, if the ball comes along
-easily and well, it pays far better to determine at all
-costs to keep up the wicket, to abandon the more
-attractive methods of the hitter, and let the runs
-come, as they almost inevitably will come under such
-circumstances.</p>
-
-<p>A great feature of the cricket of this year was the
-immense improvement noticeable in Murdoch’s play;
-from this time forward he took rank as one of the
-greatest batsmen of the time, and perhaps the best of
-all the Australian players that have come to us. It
-is gratifying to see that, as in the case of our own
-champion, the ever-vigorous “W. G.,” Murdoch’s
-perfect upright style has enabled him to keep up a
-more than respectable proportion of his best form
-through at least twenty-five years of first-class
-cricket. This very day in April 1903, the morning
-paper tells us that, snow-showers and north winds<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[228]</a></span>
-notwithstanding, these two grand old cricketers are
-once more making an excellent appearance, going in
-first together at Kennington Oval. Long may they
-flourish! Another name that strikes us as appearing
-for the first time in these matches is that of G.
-Bonnor. We have already noticed the athletic and
-powerful frames that help our Australian friends so
-frequently to distinction in cricket, but how can we
-sufficiently admire the really magnificent physique
-of this giant among cricketers! 6 feet 6 inches in
-height and between 16 and 17 stones in weight, a very
-fast runner and prodigious thrower, we might well
-search the country through before we find his match
-as a splendid specimen of humanity. Let the reader
-think over all the men of at all similar proportions
-that he has ever met with, and see which of them
-could run at full speed and pick up a ball in the
-long field as he could. In so big a man this great
-activity implies a perfection of muscular development
-and proportion that is very rarely met with, and to
-see Bonnor hit and field at cricket may without
-exaggeration be described as the realisation of an
-almost ideal athletic experience.</p>
-
-<p>There have been endless discussions as to who has
-been actually the biggest hitter at cricket within
-living memory, but in the writer’s mind there is no
-doubt that Bonnor’s extra power gave him the first
-place for distance, although C. I. Thornton’s much
-more perfect swing made the competition a closer
-race than their relative physical powers would lead
-one to expect. Bonnor, Macdonnell, Massie, Lyons&mdash;what
-prodigious smacks to the unfortunate ball
-do these names bring to our recollection! It will
-be indeed a bad day for the old game when the
-conditions do not give reasonable encouragement to
-this heroic type of batsman, and, at all events while
-Jessop continues to play, we may well hope that there
-is no immediate danger of the race becoming extinct.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-323.jpg" width="400" height="506" id="i228"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc25" summary="c25">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>A. S. Wortley.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>DR. W. G. GRACE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[229]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Taken as a whole, the team showed a decided
-advance on their predecessors, and Murdoch and
-Macdonnell in particular gave many fine displays of
-batting. The bowling suffered from the absence of
-Garrett, and the failure of any adequate substitute to
-take his place, and also from Spofforth’s absence in
-half the eleven-a-side matches. When he was able to
-play, however, his bowling was as irresistible as ever,
-while Palmer at once worked his way into the front
-rank of bowlers.</p>
-
-<p>A new departure in the programme was made in
-the match against a picked England eleven played
-rather too late in the year, on 6th September. The
-weather, however, was all that could be wished at
-that time, and a great match resulted in a well-deserved
-win for England by five wickets. Murdoch
-and W. G. Grace were fittingly the batting heroes
-of the match, and the time was evidently at hand
-when the best English eleven would find its equal
-in our rapidly improving Australian friends. Only
-four matches lost out of thirty-seven played was the
-final result, although only eleven of these were eleven-a-side
-matches, and the programme did not provide the
-sterner test of later tours.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[230]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In the winter of 1881 a very strong professional
-eleven under the captaincy of Alfred Shaw played a
-short round of first-class matches in Australia, and
-amongst these were two matches against Australia and
-two against the Australian eleven which was to come
-to England in 1882. The two Australian sides consisted
-of practically the same players, except that
-Evans was not included in the team to visit England.
-So strong, however, was that team that it is difficult
-to say who could have been advisedly left out to
-make a place for him.</p>
-
-<p>The results of these four matches clearly indicated
-the great strength of Australian cricket at this time.
-Two wins and two drawn games against a side which
-had Barlow, Ulyett, Selby, Bates, Shrewsbury, Midwinter,
-and Scotton to bat, and Peate, A. Shaw, Barlow,
-Bates, Ulyett, and Emmett to bowl, was a thoroughly
-unmistakable performance, and added immensely to
-the interest with which the arrival of the 1882
-Australian eleven was anticipated. No absolutely
-new names had appeared on the colonial side, but
-the standard of play had everywhere made a distinct
-upward movement, and almost every man of the
-eleven had reached the prime of his powers. An
-opportune alteration of the match list for that year
-provided eleven-a-side matches throughout the tour, a
-better test, and one likely to keep up the interest and
-play of the men more efficiently than a number of
-matches against odds, which are no particular honour
-to win or disgrace to lose.</p>
-
-<p>A glance at the composition of this famous<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[231]</a></span>
-eleven shows a collection of very well distributed
-powers. For batting, Murdoch, now at his best&mdash;and
-that means no small praise; Horan, a talented, correct
-player, who, although not very successful with the
-first eleven, was now one of the best in Australia;
-Massie, Bannerman, Bonnor, Giffen, greatly improved,
-and soon to be one of the best all-round players of the
-day; Macdonnell, Blackham, and S. Jones. In bowling,
-Spofforth, Palmer, Boyle, Garrett, and Giffen&mdash;probably
-as good a company as ever bowled together
-in one eleven. Blackham to keep wicket. No wonder
-that the cricket critics, whose numbers were rapidly increasing,
-have never ceased to dispute whether this
-eleven or one of those that have come to us since
-1896 was the stronger.</p>
-
-<p>Unquestionably from 1884 to 1894 the Australian
-form steadily declined, but whether the improvement
-that has since set in has reached or passed the level of
-1882 and 1884, is a question of considerable difficulty
-to tackle, and has moreover this recommendation,
-so thoroughly favourable to the pronouncement of
-varied and strongly-laid-down opinions, that from the
-conditions of the problem it is impossible that the issue
-can ever be really conclusive. Whatever may be the
-reader’s verdict on this vexed point, no one can deny
-that few elevens have ever contained so many brilliant
-performers in their own departments of the game.</p>
-
-<p>The days of a series of test matches had not yet
-arrived, although efforts were even then made by
-those arranging matters to fix dates for them.
-Some more years of hammering against the gates of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[232]</a></span>
-cricket conservatism were necessary before this most
-palpably necessary improvement was instituted.</p>
-
-<p>The one England match was as usual fixed very
-late in the season, 28th August, and for the first
-time an ever-memorable contest resulted in a narrow
-win for Australia by 7 runs. Two very fine elevens
-fought it out on difficult wickets, and in the end
-England failed to score the 84 that was required
-of them by the above-mentioned small margin.
-Spofforth’s bowling fourteen wickets for 90 runs
-stands out conspicuously, but, for so important a
-trial of strength, what a pity that wicket conditions
-should have rendered such figures possible!</p>
-
-<p>It was curious that, out of four matches lost
-during the whole tour, two were against Cambridge
-University and Cambridge Past and Present. The
-other two defeats were at the hands of the Players
-and the North of England, and these four defeats
-make a very small total when placed against twenty-three
-victories out of a long series of thirty-eight
-matches, while the average strength of the opposing
-elevens was far in excess of anything previously met
-with.</p>
-
-<p>The winter of 1882 saw a mixed team of amateurs
-and professionals, under captaincy of the present
-writer, start for a tour in Australia. The all-round
-strength of the side was very considerable, but only
-four of their number had been chosen to represent
-England in the previous summer. However, as the
-remainder included Morley, Bates, W. W. Read, and
-Tylecote, the paper form was undoubtedly strong,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[233]</a></span>
-and had not illness and accident, especially the unfortunate
-mishap which more or less crippled Morley,
-their only first-class fast bowler, been unfortunately
-frequent, an even better record than the respectable
-results achieved might have been realised. A rubber
-of three matches was played with the victorious 1882
-Australian eleven, and after each had easily won a
-match, the decisive game ended at Sydney in the
-victory of England by 69 runs.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket enthusiasm was at a very high pitch in
-Australia at this time, the first victory of Australia
-over England having greatly excited the public
-mind, and the attendance at the test matches exceeded
-all previous records.</p>
-
-<p>The rubber having now been won by England, a
-suggestion was made that another match should be
-arranged, and one or two players included in the
-Australian side who had not been to England with
-Murdoch. Evans and Midwinter were accordingly
-chosen to take the places of Garrett and Macdonnell,
-and, although it seemed highly doubtful if this change
-was calculated to be for the better, its advocates
-would doubtless claim the justification of their choice
-in the Australian victory which resulted by four
-wickets. Fifty-five thousand people were supposed
-to have witnessed the play during the four days that
-the match occupied, and a new plan was adopted of
-having a fresh wicket for each of the four innings.
-This was necessitated by the peculiar nature of the
-Sydney turf, a thick-bladed, flat-growing grass, which
-looked perfectly smooth, but wore very badly.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[234]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>These four matches showed the Australians
-hardly perhaps in their best form, but Bonnor,
-Bannerman, and, in the last match, Blackham, did
-some excellent service in batting, especially the first-named.
-His hitting in three out of the four matches
-was terrific, and most difficult to deal with, as our
-English eyes were not so well able, in the very clear
-atmosphere of these latitudes, to judge the many
-high twisting catches which he impartially presented
-to various fieldsmen. In an innings of 87 in the
-fourth match he was supposed to have been missed
-eight or ten times, and several of these misses were
-to be laid to the charge of a usually very safe fieldsman
-who shall be nameless. The demoralising effect
-of such a succession of disasters on our bowlers and
-fieldsmen may be well imagined, and the problem of
-how long a bowler should be kept on who is having
-a chance missed off him nearly every over presented
-itself in its most perplexing form to our captain.</p>
-
-<p>The Australian bowling as usual found itself in
-safe and capable hands, in the persons of Spofforth,
-Palmer, Boyle, etc., while the Australian summer
-supplied us with an unusual number of wet wickets,
-much to the delight of the sheep-farmers who came
-from all parts of Australia to see the games.</p>
-
-<p>On the English side Steel proved a tower of
-strength in both bowling and batting, and Leslie,
-Barlow, Bates, and Read all well upheld their batting
-reputations. Of the bowlers, Barlow and Bates did
-about the best work, and the latter performed one or
-two notable feats in this line. The want of a reliable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[235]</a></span>
-fast bowler was many a time sorely felt, poor
-Morley, who attempted to play several matches with
-a broken rib, breaking down time after time.</p>
-
-<p>For the first time Queensland was visited by an
-English eleven, but the experience, in spite of the
-extraordinary hospitality and kindness of the Queenslanders,
-was not altogether encouraging. The semi-tropical
-heat caused several slight cases of sun effects
-amongst our players, and the drenching thundershowers
-necessitated, in one case, small drains being
-dug quite near the pitch to allow the water to subside
-quickly after the storms.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket touring in Australia in those days differed
-from more modern experiences in several respects.
-The railways between Adelaide and Melbourne and
-Melbourne and Queensland had not yet been completed,
-so that most disturbing little sea journeys,
-lasting about thirty-six hours, on small and not overclean
-steamers, had to be undertaken on several
-occasions. Nothing more calculated to temporarily
-disarrange the health and form of a travelling
-cricket eleven could be well imagined, and the
-railway journeys which have now been substituted
-must be far preferable, from the player’s point of
-view.</p>
-
-<p>The cricket grounds in the chief capitals were
-already very good, but in Adelaide the turf had
-been too recently laid to have nearly reached the
-perfection to which it afterwards attained. In
-Sydney, the species of grass which has been before
-alluded to has now, we believe, been altered to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[236]</a></span>
-English grass, then supposed to be quite unsuited
-to the climate, with the best possible results.</p>
-
-<p>No new players of any prominence appeared
-among the Australians, unless we make an exception
-in the case of W. H. Cooper, the Victorian. He
-had already played in first-class cricket for some
-years, and had made a considerable reputation by his
-wonderful leg breaks. The usual penalty attaching
-to this great power of twist, viz. loss of pitch, always
-made him a very doubtful quantity, and he was
-liable to be ruinously expensive in the matter of
-runs.</p>
-
-<p>The arrival of an Australian eleven in England
-every second year had now become quite an
-established custom, and 1884 saw a strong selection
-of players once more with us. The changes in the
-personnel proved to be the substitution of Scott,
-Midwinter, Alexander, and Cooper for Horan, Massie,
-S. Jones, and Garrett, and there can hardly be a
-contrary opinion that this change was slightly for
-the worse. Scott certainly sustained his own part
-with considerable success, but the displaced four
-names proved in the long run to be very difficult to
-replace adequately.</p>
-
-<p>Three matches with England produced the not
-very satisfactory result of two drawn games and one
-win for England, a foretaste of the indecisive
-sequences which have stirred up the attempts at
-legislative interference in later times. Although unable
-to win one of the three matches, the Australians
-had certainly rather the best of the two that were
-undecided. In the first match, at Manchester,
-England was only 93 runs on with one wicket to
-fall, after a first innings of 182; and in the third
-match, at the Oval, they gave us a very fine display of
-batting, winning the toss and making 551, the largest
-total yet recorded in these matches.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-333.jpg" width="400" height="515" id="i236"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap">YOUTH WITH A CRICKET BAT</p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>Supposed to have been Painted about 1780</i>).</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[237]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Murdoch, true to his character of leading batsman,
-headed the list with 211, Macdonnell 103, and
-Scott 102, while the English bowling was reduced to
-such straits that Alfred Lyttelton’s lobs were afforded
-the chance of a lifetime, and actually captured the
-last four wickets for 19 runs!</p>
-
-<p>When in the first innings eight English wickets
-had fallen for 181 runs on a good wicket, the match
-looked almost over, but with W. W. Read’s appearance
-began a notable partnership, which was not
-broken before 151 runs had been added to the score.
-Read’s 117 ranks very high indeed among the great
-innings of great matches, and his mastery of the
-varied and excellent bowling brought against him
-was complete. Two wickets down for 85 runs
-represented England’s second innings, and Australia
-could claim an immense advantage on the match as
-far as it went.</p>
-
-<p>The third match, at Lord’s, ended in quite another
-fashion with a one-innings defeat for Australia,
-principally due to a very fine 148 by A. G. Steel for
-England, and some excellent bowling by the two
-Yorkshiremen, Peate and Ulyett.</p>
-
-<p>The English representative eleven of the day
-showed a very high standard of play, especially in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[238]</a></span>
-batting. When one finds A. Lyttelton going in
-ninth on the list of batsmen, and W. W. Read tenth,
-the side may be safely estimated to be as strong in
-batting as any that has ever played together. The
-bowling, on the other hand, did not stand out in
-quite such overwhelming strength, although Peate,
-Ulyett, A. G. Steel, Barnes, and Barlow are a by
-no means contemptible selection. On the whole
-year’s performances in batting, Murdoch once more
-emphasised his superiority, with an average of 30 per
-innings, 1.7 in advance of his next competitor, while
-most of the older hands, in addition to Scott, came
-out on the list with good figures.</p>
-
-<p>Spofforth’s bowling was if possible even more
-successful than before&mdash;216 wickets, with an average
-of 12 runs per wicket; with Palmer second, with 132
-wickets for an average of 16 runs. These two, with
-Boyle and Giffen, made up an attack strong at all
-points.</p>
-
-<p>Eighteen matches won and seven lost does not
-compare too favourably with the figures of the 1882
-eleven, and this difference was, we think, exactly to
-be accounted for by the slight change for the worse
-in the alteration made in the old eleven by the substitution
-of the four new men before alluded to.</p>
-
-<p>Although their successes had possibly not quite
-equalled those of 1882, the four players who had not
-been able to come to England were still in as good
-form as ever, and Australian cricket at this time was
-still at about its highest point. No real symptoms
-of that gradual decline which lasted up to 1894<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[239]</a></span>
-had commenced to show themselves before about
-1885-86.</p>
-
-<p>In the winter of 1884 another strong lot of
-professionals under Alfred Shaw visited Australia,
-and an unfortunate dispute with the lately-returned
-Australian eleven deprived most of the chief matches
-of their representative character, as the members of
-the Australian eleven refused to play in them.
-However, towards the end of the tour matters were
-smoothed over, and three matches were played against
-Australia’s full strength. The first, a very fine
-struggle, was won by Australia by 7 runs, the second
-by the same side by eight wickets, and the third by
-the Englishmen by an innings and 98 runs. The
-professionals were a very strong side at all points
-of the game, and Barnes greatly distinguished himself
-by heading both batting and bowling averages,
-sharing the batting honours with Shrewsbury and
-Bates, while the bowling was very equally distributed
-among six well-known names, Barnes, Bates, Flowers,
-Attewell, Ulyett, and Peel.</p>
-
-<p>The 1886 Australian eleven in England furnished
-some names new to English grounds, and for the
-first time Evans was able to find the time for the
-journey. As it turned out, however, his great reputation
-would have been better cared for if he had
-not been brought over for the first time when his
-powers were decidedly on the wane, and both in
-batting and bowling he was practically a failure.
-Jarvis appears as a wicket-keeper, and a very
-able colleague to Blackham he has always proved<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[240]</a></span>
-himself, besides being at times useful with the bat.
-J. Trumble, W. Bruce, and M’Ilwraith are the other
-new names, and of these, Bruce alone has made much
-mark in first-class cricket,&mdash;a beautiful fieldsman
-and thrower, and a pretty, hard-hitting, left-handed
-batsman, but one who has never quite succeeded in
-doing himself full justice on English grounds.</p>
-
-<p>The same signs of deterioration that were observable
-in the 1884 eleven, as compared with that of
-1882, were now more strongly pronounced. The
-new men were quite unable to adequately replace
-Murdoch, Macdonnell, Bannerman, Massie, Horan,
-and Boyle, while, to add to their misfortunes,
-Spofforth met with a severe accident which crippled
-him for some time, and never allowed him to again
-reach his proper form during the tour. On the
-other hand, their English opponents could command
-a very strong side, and in place of the dearth of fine
-new players which the Australians were experiencing,
-found ready to hand several younger players of
-great promise. The days of Lohmann, Briggs, and
-Stoddart were commencing, names that were destined
-to furnish a difficult nut for Australians to crack for
-many a day. The older men too on the English
-side were all at the best period of their play, and
-Grace, Shrewsbury, Read, and Steel could hardly fail
-to put up a big score among them on any given
-occasion. The only cheerful feature of a dismal
-record, in which the nine victories could only claim
-a narrow lead of one over the eight defeats, was the
-fine all-round form of Giffen. This great player,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[241]</a></span>
-now at the top of his game, headed both batting and
-bowling averages, and was to be from this time a
-tower of strength to Australian cricket. Spofforth’s
-unfortunate accident came at a time when there
-seemed every likelihood of his being quite as successful
-as ever, but from that time to the end of the
-tour his bowling powers seemed to have temporarily
-deserted him, and that alone was a disaster to the
-side of the very first magnitude. Garrett and Palmer
-still continued to do yeoman service in bowling,
-although rather more expensive than formerly, and
-both S. Jones and Scott gave some fine batting
-displays.</p>
-
-<p>Of the three matches against England, the first
-was won by England by the small margin of four
-wickets, and each of the other two in one innings.
-Fortune had indeed deserted our Australian friends
-for the moment, and, worst of all, the absence of
-promising young players gave no hope for the
-immediate future. Yet, if we consider for a moment
-how comparatively small had been the amount of
-first-class cricket hitherto played in Australia, we
-may well rather wonder at the remarkable brilliancy
-of the players sent to us up to this time, than that
-they should now find some difficulty in replacing them.</p>
-
-<p>Without making invidious distinctions, it may be
-safely asserted that in these last two Australian elevens
-of 1884 and 1886, the loss of Murdoch’s captaincy
-was severely felt, as he always seemed to have the
-happy knack of keeping his team well in hand and
-up to the highest standard of their play.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[242]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Once more in 1886 did a strong team of professionals
-go to Australia under the indefatigable
-Shaw and Shrewsbury. Although beaten twice by
-New South Wales, they won four matches out of
-five against representative Australian elevens, the
-other being drawn, no mean achievement. The days
-of Turner and Ferris were beginning, and the former
-was now rapidly becoming one of the great bowlers
-of the day. A beautifully easy delivery and great
-power of pace, combined with a quickness of break
-back that baffled the strongest defence, were the
-characteristics of this fine cricketer’s style. Ferris,
-although not so attractive in his methods, made an
-excellent colleague in their bowling partnership, with
-his steady left-handed deliveries.</p>
-
-<p>Lyons for the first time appears among the representative
-Australian players. Very big and powerful,
-he proved a worthy successor to the great hitters of
-the earlier Australian elevens, and some of his hitting,
-performed with little apparent effort and without
-moving the feet, was a wonderful exhibition of sheer
-muscular force of arm. Giffen’s loss from illness
-was a great blow to the Australians, and some of the
-older bowlers were now losing something of their
-skill. On the other side, the English bowling was
-very strong, with Lohmann and Briggs to lead it, and
-Shrewsbury at the top of his form in batting.</p>
-
-<p>So popular had these Australian tours now become
-that in the winter of 1887-88 two separate English
-elevens visited Australia, one under G. F. Vernon,
-and the other under Shrewsbury. This division<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243">[243]</a></span>
-of forces, which was for many reasons to be regretted,
-did not appear to materially affect their
-chances of success, as the teams lost only two
-or three matches between them. H. Trott and
-H. Trumble were prominently seen for the first time
-this season, and were both destined to take a very
-leading part in the games of the next few years.
-Trumble as a bowler is probably now second to none,
-making admirable use of his great height, and
-exercising the best of judgment in his admixture of
-different paces and flights. Trott, an excellent batsman
-and useful change bowler, was always a useful
-man on the side, but it has been his fine judgment
-as captain that has proved him to be so invaluable a
-member of it.</p>
-
-<p>The representatives of Australia were met three
-times by Shrewsbury’s eleven, and twice by Vernon’s,
-and all these five matches ended in English success&mdash;crushing
-evidence of the now seriously deteriorated
-form of the Australians. Shrewsbury and W. W.
-Read gave many fine exhibitions of batting, and came
-out more than 25 points ahead of their nearest
-competitors in the batting list. Lohmann and Briggs
-for Shrewsbury’s side, and Attewell and Peel for
-Vernon’s, did most of the bowling with conspicuous
-success.</p>
-
-<p>The 1890 Australian eleven for England furnished
-a surprise in the return of Murdoch to the headship
-of affairs, and, in spite of some obvious disadvantages
-of increasing age and weight, his form was once
-more able to place him at the head of the batting<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244">[244]</a></span>
-averages. First of a rather moderate lot must be
-the estimate of this performance, and only Barrett
-besides himself was able to claim an average of over
-20, his and Barrett’s being 23 and 22 respectively.
-Barrett, here for the first time, was a left-handed bat
-with dogged powers of defence, highly uninteresting
-to watch. Burn, the Tasmanian, a batsman of some
-reputation, did not show to much advantage over here,
-and Walters, a powerful Victorian, who had proved
-a great run-getter in Australia for some years, seemed
-quite unable to accommodate himself to altered conditions.
-S. E. Gregory appears for the first time,
-and at once made a name for himself by his wonderful
-fielding and throwing in from cover-point or
-mid-off. The powers of batting which were to make
-him so useful a member of most of the Australian
-elevens of the next few years were not yet much in
-evidence. The most of the bowling was as before
-entirely thrown on the shoulders of the undaunted
-pair, Turner and Ferris, and most admirably did they
-acquit themselves. 215 wickets for an average of
-12 and 215 wickets for an average of 13 are figures
-that speak eloquently of a hard season’s work well
-performed. Charlton and Trumble were their assistants
-nearest in point of performance, but Trumble,
-although at that time a steady persevering bowler, had
-not yet acquired sufficient mastery of break and pace
-to be really dangerous. For the first time the losses
-of the team, sixteen, exceed the victories, thirteen, a
-terrible falling-off from the successes of ten years ago.
-Three matches were arranged against the full strength<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245">[245]</a></span>
-of England, but only the first two were played, both
-won by England, by seven wickets and two wickets
-respectively, the third match being abandoned
-through rain. It was said, not untruthfully, that
-these two narrow defeats against strong English
-sides, especially the latter of the two, conferred more
-credit on the Australians than any other of their
-performances, but an eleven can hardly be congratulated
-that has such a criticism as its chief
-recommendation.</p>
-
-<p>In the winter of 1891-92 quite a new plan was
-carried out, Lord Sheffield collecting and taking out
-a strong English eleven, including once more the
-veteran “W. G.,” Stoddart, and other fine players.
-The eleven, to be really representative of England’s
-strength, would have required some additions to the
-batting, but Grace, Stoddart, M. Read, and Abel made
-at all events a strong backbone to the defence, and
-the bowling was well up to the highest mark in the
-hands of Briggs, Lohmann, Attewell, and Peel.
-Three matches were played against combined
-Australia, the first two being lost by 55 and 72 runs,
-and the third won easily in one innings. Of this
-last match, however, it should be said that the two
-sides batted under quite unequal conditions, the
-English on a hard dry wicket, and the Australians on
-one spoilt by rain. Lyons, Bannerman, and Bruce
-all did excellent service in batting, and Lyons’ second
-innings of 134 in the Sydney match was a very fine
-display of hitting. Australian bowling had suffered
-considerably from the absence in England of Ferris,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246">[246]</a></span>
-and Turner, although still about the best Australian
-bowler, was hardly so deadly as formerly. Grace
-was able to show his Australian admirers that the
-eighteen years that had elapsed since his last visit
-had little diminished his marvellous skill, and his
-average of 44 in eleven-a-side matches brought him
-easily to the top, Abel, Stoddart, and M. Read all
-coming out with good figures.</p>
-
-<p>The improved form of the Australians this season
-added much to the interest which was felt in the
-1893 Australian eleven, who came, moreover, as a
-thoroughly representative side, no other Australian
-cricketer, except possibly Moses, having any real
-claim for selection. An advance on the form of the
-last few years they certainly exhibited, but, although
-the quality of the cricket opposed to them was
-certainly of great merit, the summed-up results of
-the tour, eighteen matches won to ten lost, cannot be
-said to show conclusively that all the lost ground had
-yet been made up.</p>
-
-<p>The season of 1893 was exceptionally sunny and
-fine, so that many more hard wickets were played on
-than in an average English summer. The strain on
-the bowlers of a travelling eleven was accordingly
-severe, and Turner was not able to preserve the unassailed
-position of superiority hitherto held by him.
-On the hard wickets G. Giffen was perhaps the best
-bowler of the side, and he is said to have not unreasonably
-complained of the invariable regularity
-with which his bowling was made use of on the hard
-wickets, while, on the more difficult wickets, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247">[247]</a></span>
-other bowlers were able to dispose of their more
-easily conquered victims.</p>
-
-<p>A great improvement is to observed in Trumble
-both in batting and bowling, and he had now reached
-a formidable degree of power in both departments of
-the game. Graham made a most promising <i>début</i> as
-a bat and fine out-field; indeed, his batting was quite
-one of the features of the tour. Another pair of
-batsmen of most unequal appearance and batting
-methods were also very successful, Lyons and A.
-Bannerman, who generally went in first together.
-Some of Lyons’ hitting ranks high among the
-recorded feats of big hitting, and Bannerman’s dogged
-defence was never more usefully employed during
-his long career. G. H. Trott, too, and G. Giffen
-were both generally useful with the bat, and the
-eleven throughout showed a higher level of batting
-power than had been seen for some years.</p>
-
-<p>If we compare this eleven with the strong years
-of 1882 and 1884, we should say that the 1893 team
-would naturally suffer in the absence of Murdoch at
-his best, and in the bowling falling somewhat below
-the standard of that of the four great bowlers of that
-day, Turner not being at his best and Trumble not
-quite attained to his full powers.</p>
-
-<p>The English representatives of this year were of
-great strength. Grace, Shrewsbury, Stoddart, Gunn,
-Jackson, A. Ward, W. W. Read, all in fine form,
-made an immensely strong batting combination, while
-an era of great fast bowlers was arising, with
-Richardson, Mold, and Lockwood all now coming<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248">[248]</a></span>
-to the full possession of their great powers, and the
-slow bowling in the safe and capable hands of Briggs
-and Peel. It is doubtful if in the whole history
-of English cricket three such exceptionally fine fast
-bowlers as these ever flourished at the same time, and
-the bowling of one or other of them influenced the
-play of most of the great matches for some years at
-this time.</p>
-
-<p>Only one of the three matches against England
-was played to a finish, and that resulted in a one-innings
-victory for England. The other two both
-ended in draws none too favourable to the chances
-of an Australian victory.</p>
-
-<p>Many fine innings were played by the chief
-English players during these matches, while Graham
-with 107 at Lord’s and Trott with 92 at the Oval did
-great things for the Australians.</p>
-
-<p>A great drawback to Australian success in a
-summer so favourable to hard wickets was the absence
-of a reliable fast bowler. The days of E. Jones were
-now soon to begin, and had he been available at this
-time, a great addition to the all-round strength would
-have been realised. The unusual wealth of bowlers of
-this description in the English elevens at this time
-made this weakness especially noticeable.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-347.jpg" width="400" height="186" id="i248"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>AN ELEVEN OF MISS WICKETS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249">[249]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>And now, having traced in somewhat cursory
-fashion the ups and downs of Australian <i>v.</i> English
-cricket through some thirty-two years of its earlier
-existence, we leave the history of its further development
-at a time when the present generation of
-Australian players are beginning to make their
-appearance. The process of development between the
-days of 1861 and the date of the first Australian
-eleven, 1878, seems to have been gradual and steady.
-With the arrival of that notable eleven were apparent
-great possibilities in the future, and, quicker even
-than could have been thought possible, came the
-rapid progress, until the culminating point of 1882 and
-1884 was reached. From that time came the curiously
-steady and disappointing decline, till, as we have
-lately seen, the 1893 team once more gave promise
-that the ten lean years were over, and a new era of
-prosperity about to begin. Right up to the present
-day Australians were now to show themselves fully
-equal to meeting our very best on even terms both
-here and in the Colonies.</p>
-
-<p>How profoundly this interchange of cricketing
-visits has influenced the course of cricket in England
-can hardly be too much insisted upon. Without
-them a representative English eleven would have
-never been seen in the field at all, and how great a
-loss this fact alone would have been to the cricketing
-world, both of players and spectators, can hardly be
-overstated.</p>
-
-<p>That our Australian cousins should so soon have
-been able to tackle us on even terms, in spite of their
-vastly smaller population and their comparatively
-small number of first-class matches, must always be
-a somewhat humbling problem for our cricketing
-philosophers. Certainly they have the advantage of
-a longer cricketing season, and a greater likelihood of
-finding the weather sufficiently fine to ensure their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250">[250]</a></span>
-cricket being played on good wickets. In this last
-factor we may probably find the key to the whole
-matter, and, favourable conditions being their normal
-experience, we may always look with confidence to
-them for a very high level of play, and one that will
-tax to the utmost the capacity of our best players.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251">[251]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-351.jpg" width="400" height="183"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER IX</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">ENGLISH AND AUSTRALIAN CRICKET FROM 1894 TO 1902</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">A. C. Maclaren</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">In</span> the autumn of 1894 Mr. A. E. Stoddart, acting
-upon the invitation from the New South Wales and
-Victorian Cricket Association, sailed for Australia,
-with a side composed of the following players: A. E.
-Stoddart, F. G. J. Ford, H. Philipson, L. H. Gay,
-A. C. Maclaren, T. Richardson, W. Brockwell,
-W. Lockwood, A. Ward, J. Briggs, R. Peel, J. T.
-Brown, and W. Humphreys. In the selection of his
-team Mr. Stoddart gave general satisfaction, although
-some well-known names were missing, which was not
-surprising, since it is impossible for all who are invited
-to see their way to leave home for seven months of
-the year. If there was a weak spot in the team, it
-was generally admitted to lie in the batting; yet, as
-events proved, the bowling was the more unreliable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252">[252]</a></span>
-of the two. It should not be forgotten, however, that
-bowlers cannot possibly be expected to come out with
-the same figures as on our English wickets; and in
-the same way, it is only reasonable to expect our batsmen
-to do even better than on our home wickets,
-which certainly do not come up to those of Australia,
-where the climate can be depended upon. L. H. Gay,
-whose performances at Cambridge were of such excellence
-that the English skipper invited him without
-ever having had the opportunity of seeing him perform
-behind the wickets, kept so much below his form, at
-the outset of the tour, that the second string, H. Philipson,
-took his place, and with such excellent results that
-the old Cantab never secured a place in the team at
-all. The wicket-keeping of H. Philipson had not a
-little to do with our winning the rubber. The tour
-opened none too auspiciously, since we went down
-before South Australia, our first big engagement;
-but too much importance ought never to be
-attached to the opening game, owing to those who
-have not previously visited Australia being wholly
-unaccustomed to the great glare of Adelaide, and to the
-fast pace of the wicket. Again, it should not be forgotten
-that the captain, without wishing to jeopardise
-his chance of a win, distributes his bowling as equally
-as he can, since there are but two matches before the
-first test match takes place, and the men who are not
-bowling their length in these early games are given
-longer turns with the ball than they would have in a
-test match. Thus, when a man is found to be in form,
-not much use is made of him, unless the game appears<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253">[253]</a></span>
-to take a turn against his side; and the necessary
-amount of trundling meted out to those out of form
-may have been the means of keeping off the star
-bowler too long. The Australians, when touring in
-England, work on very similar lines, to enable them
-to get the side as well balanced as possible for the test
-matches, which is sufficient to prevent them from
-quite winning one or two of the early games. In our
-first innings at Adelaide, no fault could be found with
-our batting, since Lockwood, Ford, Ward, Stoddart,
-Briggs, and Gay all scored from 38 to 66, whilst
-Brown scored 113 out of a total of 477. Our opponents
-replied with 338, Darling, whose first big match
-it was, contributing a fine innings of 117, whilst Clem
-Hill also made his bow to the public, being sent in to
-bat No. 10, and scoring 20 runs. Richardson, who
-never got his length, since he kept over-pitching
-the ball, was bowled a great deal, which was only
-natural, his one wicket costing 83 runs, whilst Peel,
-as a contrast, took five wickets for 69; Lockwood had
-70 knocked off him without taking a wicket, and
-Briggs 74 for two wickets, whilst Humphreys took
-two for 62. But in regard to the last-named, it was
-apparent to all that he would do little or no good in
-the first-class matches, since the Australians treated
-him with the greatest respect, refusing absolutely to
-be drawn; thus the out-fields had little or nothing to
-do, and singles and twos, chiefly by placing, were the
-result. It caused us no surprise when our captain
-decided to leave him out in the eleven-a-side matches.
-That Humphreys was past his prime, I for one will<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254">[254]</a></span>
-not admit, for his bowling was as good as anything
-he showed us at home; but, with only three days to
-finish a game, it is not surprising that our players, for
-the most part, played a free game when pitted against
-him, whilst the Australians preferred to take no
-liberties when such were unnecessary, owing to the
-games being played to a finish in their own country.
-To these altered conditions of the game do I attribute
-the failure of the lob bowler, for he used his head
-well, and his fieldsmen, upon whom a lob bowler must
-depend, were all that he could have wished. During
-our tour it was very evident that our opponents
-intended to do little or no hitting, with one or two
-exceptions, and I am of opinion that their policy is the
-best; indeed, with the exception of hitting in the air
-for the purpose of keeping a man in the out-field, I
-would have none of it, and would never wish to see
-any member of my side attempt the same, excepting
-always the hitter of the Jessop or Ford type. It had
-very nearly escaped my memory that Humphreys
-carried all before him in the up-country or picnic
-matches, the locals for the most part attempting to hit
-him out of the ground, with disastrous results so far
-as they were concerned. To return to the Adelaide
-match, our batting failed hopelessly in the second
-innings, although the wicket played well right up to
-the finish, our opponents being left with 226 to win,
-and obtaining the same for the loss of four men, Reedman,
-of somewhat awkward style, scoring 83 of the
-number. Journeying on to Melbourne, we were more
-successful, for, always having a bit the best of matters,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[255]</a></span>
-we eventually won by 145. The batting was rather
-uneven, for Stoddart, Peel, and myself scored no fewer
-than 350 out of 416. A. E. Trott bowled far and
-away the best of our opponents, taking six for 103;
-whereas C. M’Leod, of whom much was expected,
-could claim but two victims for 89 runs. Beyond his
-length, there was little in his deliveries, although later
-in the tour he bowled a ball which went away with
-his arm, and which required very careful watching.
-Our opponents replied with a total of 306, Harry
-Trott coming out best with a score of 70; but there
-was nothing which struck us very much in regard to
-the batting of our opponents in this innings. Peel
-did what little he had to do with the ball very well,
-taking three for 27, and Briggs, who had a long turn,
-came out with the satisfactory analysis of five for 97.
-Richardson, however, was far from himself yet, so far
-as his bowling was concerned, but I can well remember
-dropping two easy catches off his bowling at cover-point,
-and I was not the only culprit. The fast
-bowler’s later successes only gave us a further proof,
-if any was needed, of what determination and stamina
-he was possessed. In our second innings, Stoddart,
-78, again was seen at his best, with Briggs 43, and
-Peel 165. C. M’Leod came out with the best bowling
-figures, taking four for 71. When the Victorians
-went in to bat, Peel, five for 73, and Briggs, three for
-95, were too much for them. H. Trott, 63, and
-R. M’Leod, 62, did best. Our first match with New
-South Wales resulted in a very easy win for us, after
-Iredale, in the first innings, proved himself well worthy<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[256]</a></span>
-of a place in the forthcoming test match, by scoring
-133 in his best style. The batting of our opponents
-was very laborious, the total of 293 taking a long
-time to compile, Peel bowling no fewer than forty-seven
-overs for 75 runs and three wickets. Humphreys
-had one more trial, but without success. Our total of
-394 was made up of three big innings from Brown,
-117, Stoddart, 79, and Brockwell, 81 run out, the latter
-playing a beautiful innings. In this match Howell
-astonished all by taking five wickets for 44, a very
-fine performance, on that excellent wicket at Sydney.
-C. T. B. Turner, on the other hand, was far from
-successful, taking but one wicket for 100 runs, and
-on the face of this performance it would have been
-better to have played the younger man in the
-following week, as events proved. On going in a
-second time, Gregory was the only one who was able
-to do himself justice, Peel accounting for the
-dismissal of our opponents, his five wickets costing
-64, whilst Briggs took three for 19. Left with 81 to
-make, Ford soon knocked up 39, and we eventually
-won with eight wickets to spare.</p>
-
-<p>Prior to the first test, we played one more game,
-and that against a very poor team representing Queensland,
-the chief features of the match being the return
-to form of T. Richardson, who had the satisfaction of
-taking eight wickets for 52 in the first innings and
-three for 11 in the second, whilst in the batting,
-Stoddart, 149, Ward, 107, each topped the century.
-The time had now arrived for the first test at Sydney,
-with both sides in fairly good form. Stoddart lost the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[257]</a></span>
-toss to Trott, but so well did Richardson bowl that three
-wickets had fallen for 21 before the game had been in
-progress half an hour, Trott, Lyons, and Darling all
-being clean bowled by the fast bowler. On Iredale and
-Giffen becoming associated, the game underwent a
-remarkable change, no fewer than 171 being added for
-the fourth wicket; but had our wicket-keeper, who was
-standing back to the fast bowling, been in anything
-approaching form, no such stand for the fourth or
-for the ninth wicket could possibly have been made.
-Owing to more than one life, Giffen was batting for
-some four and a quarter hours, his cricket being marked
-by stolid defence. Iredale played a far more attractive
-game, his cutting and driving on the off side being
-excellent. After Giffen’s departure, wickets fell with
-fair regularity until Blackham joined Gregory, whose
-cricket throughout was of very high order, his cutting,
-glancing to leg, and hooking of any short ball being
-a treat to witness. For an innings of 201, the chances
-were few and far between, and it will always stand
-out as one of the best innings ever played in a test
-match. Blackham too played a great game for his
-74, which went a long way towards the making up of
-so big a total as 586. Of our bowlers, Richardson
-did really well in taking five wickets for 181, considering
-how many catches were dropped off his
-bowling. Peel, without bowling badly, certainly was
-disappointing, his two wickets costing 140 runs.
-Against the huge total of our opponents, we replied
-with 325, Ward 75, Briggs 57, Brockwell 49, and
-Gay 33, being our chief scorers, whilst Giffen certainly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[258]</a></span>
-bowled best of our opponents, keeping a perfect length
-throughout and using his head well. His four wickets
-cost 75 runs only, and bowling, as he did, forty-three
-overs after scoring 161, the performance was all the
-more remarkable. Following on, as so often happens,
-we did better at the second attempt, Ward again playing
-a splendid innings of 117, and being well backed
-up by Brown, Briggs, Ford, and Stoddart. Our total of
-437 was a good performance under the circumstances.
-Giffen, acting captain in the absence of Blackham, who
-had unfortunately damaged his thumb at the close of
-our innings of 325, had a very long bowl, his analysis
-reading, 75 overs, 25 maidens, 164 runs, 4 wickets;
-yet it could not be urged that he bowled himself too
-much, since he always looked more like wickets than
-any other bowler. If any one might have been used
-a little more, that man was H. Trott, whose style was
-so different from that of the other bowlers. With 177
-left to get to win, it was expected that our opponents
-would knock off the runs on the evening of the fifth
-day, but so slowly did they play that 64 were still
-required when stumps were pulled up for the day.
-Considering that heavy clouds were seen on the horizon
-and that Richardson had to leave the field after bowling
-a few overs, owing to having contracted a chill,
-it was all the more surprising that Giffen and Trott
-should have played in such pottering fashion on the
-fifth evening; and, without any exaggeration, no
-forcing tactics were necessary to enable the Australians
-to get the runs that evening. At the close of play
-on the fifth day, 113 runs had been scored for the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[259]</a></span>
-loss of but two wickets; then, owing to very heavy
-rains in the night, the wicket was wellnigh unplayable
-on the last morning, with the result that Peel
-and Briggs were too much for our opponents, the last
-eight men being sent back for 53, leaving us with a
-margin of 10 runs. Peel and Briggs were seen at
-their very best at the close, when the fates favoured
-us; but small as the total was, it would have been still
-less had not I, and later Brown, each missed a catch.
-Against these mistakes, however, there was an exceptionally
-fine catch by Brockwell, which sent back
-Darling, and which had as much as anything to do
-with our victory.</p>
-
-<p>The second test match at Melbourne resulted in
-another victory for us by a majority of 94 runs,
-after our opponents had won the toss and decided to
-put us in to bat. With such bowlers as Turner and
-Trumble against us, on a difficult wicket, it was not
-surprising that our total was a poor one, the whole
-side being sent back for 75. Turner took five
-wickets for 32, whilst Trumble secured three for 17,
-after Coningham had commenced the attack and had
-quickly got rid of two of the first batsmen. As
-often happens, the wicket dried at a great pace, with
-the result that we were bound to get wickets quickly
-on the afternoon of the first day’s play, if we were
-to hold any chance of winning, since it was patent to
-all that the wicket would be perfect on the following
-morning. Tom Richardson, thoroughly grasping
-the situation, fairly revelled in the importance of the
-occasion, taking five wickets for 57, and those good<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[260]</a></span>
-wickets were captured on a much-improved pitch.
-This fine performance on the part of the fast bowler
-enabled us, in the place of our opponents, to bat on
-a good wicket next day, with the result that our
-captain fairly excelled himself by scoring the huge
-total of 173, exercising much self-restraint throughout
-his long stay at the crease; and thanks to this
-fine display, and to the general consistency of the
-batting, we totalled 475. When our opponents
-went to the wickets for the last time, so well did
-Trott and Giffen play that 190 was on the board
-for the loss of but one batsman. At this stage of
-the game a wise move on the part of Stoddart,
-in handing the ball to Brockwell, brought about
-an extraordinary change, Giffen being easily taken
-at point in attempting to play a ball to leg which
-went away with the bowler’s arm, and immediately
-afterwards Trott, who had played capital cricket
-for 95, being very well caught and bowled low
-down by the same bowler, Brockwell. With the
-exception of Bruce, who hit freely for 54, no
-other batsman withstood the attack of Peel and
-Brockwell, a victory for us resulting. In regard to
-this match, I have always thought that for downright
-good cricket it was not to be beaten. The wonderful
-bowling of Richardson in the first innings, together
-with that short, sharp piece of work on the part of
-Brockwell, will ever be dear to our memory, when
-the fine batting of Trott and Giffen seemed almost
-certain to reap the reward of a win for the Colonials;
-nor will it be possible to forget the great effort on
-the part of our captain, whose long innings never
-lacked sparkle, even if the importance of the occasion
-demanded all his patience.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-361.jpg" width="400" height="540" id="i260"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc26" summary="c26">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>N. Wanostrocht.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE HON. SPENCER PONSONBY.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>Right Hon. Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane, G.C.B.</i>)</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261">[261]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The third test match, at Adelaide, was disappointing
-from a spectator’s point of view, since on a
-perfect wicket our opponents were dismissed for
-238, of which number no fewer than 79 were
-made by the last two men, A. Trott and Galloway,
-whilst our effort resulted in the paltry total of 124,
-the wicket for both teams being in a good run-getting
-condition. On going to the wickets a second time,
-our opponents played in something approaching their
-proper form, scoring 411, Iredale claiming 140, a
-very fine innings, whilst A. Trott again carried his
-bat for 72. Our second venture proved no better
-than the first, the whole side being sent back for
-143, A. Trott meeting with extraordinary success in
-taking eight wickets for 43; and seldom, if ever, has
-any one met with such success as did the younger
-Trott with bat and ball in this test match. Our
-failure was due, to a very great extent, to the excessive
-heat, which deprived us of all chance of a good
-night’s rest throughout the match, but at the time
-the match was played I have no hesitation in giving
-it as my opinion that our opponents were considerably
-the better team, and thoroughly deserved their
-victory.</p>
-
-<p>Curiously enough, the fourth test match, at Sydney,
-like the first game, was spoilt by rain, and on this
-occasion the Australians extricated themselves from
-a very awkward position as only good men can.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262">[262]</a></span>
-On winning the toss, Stoddart decided to put his
-opponents in first, a move which we, to a man, considered
-the right one, and up to a certain point all
-went very well, six of our opponents having been
-sent back for 51. Then, however, an extraordinary
-exhibition of forcing tactics at the outset, to be
-followed by more careful play, on the part of Graham,
-entirely altered the aspect of affairs, no fewer than
-284 being on the board at the close of the innings,
-A. Trott once again playing admirable cricket for 86
-not out. When the game was resumed on Monday,
-there had been so much rain overnight that the
-wicket was quite unplayable, and instead of having
-the firm wicket we had expected to bat upon, we
-found the pitch to be impossible, with the result
-that we were dismissed twice for the small totals of
-65 and 72, Turner and Giffen doing what they liked
-with the ball. Had Graham been dismissed cheaply,
-we would undoubtedly have batted for the last two
-hours of the first day, the only occasion of the wicket
-being in favour of run-getting throughout the match.
-In that case we should very likely have won, since
-our opponents would have had a bad wicket for their
-second strike. In my opinion, Graham’s performance
-in scoring 105 was one of the finest things that have
-ever happened in test matches, coming in as he did
-when the wicket was at its worst, and going right out
-to the bowling from the commencement of his innings,
-hitting to all parts of the ground, until the
-wicket gradually improved, when he settled down
-to a sounder game; nor should A. Trott’s fine<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263">[263]</a></span>
-score be overlooked, although the wicket then had
-improved.</p>
-
-<p>The final test game, at Melbourne, which was
-to decide the rubber, was one of the very best
-fights in which I have taken part. On winning
-the toss the Australians certainly gained an advantage,
-for the wicket was in perfect condition for
-long scores, and thanks to consistent scoring
-throughout the team, the good total of 434 was
-run up against us, to which number Darling 74,
-Gregory 70, and Giffen 57, were the chief contributors.
-Considering that H. Trott also made
-42, and that several others got going, it was perhaps
-astonishing that more runs were not obtained, but
-Peel, Richardson, and Briggs all kept pegging away
-in their best style, and few runs were given away.
-Our start was not too good, four wickets being down
-for some 120 runs; Stoddart alone, in scoring 68,
-playing up to form. On Peel joining me, 162 were
-added for the fifth wicket, a stand which caused it to
-be anybody’s game. Unfortunately, the tail end did
-little, and we finished the innings 29 runs to the bad.
-Of the Australian bowling, H. Trott did far better
-than any other bowler, his four wickets costing 71
-runs only, and I have always thought that had he
-bowled more in the tests there would have been a
-different tale to tell about these games. Turner
-might have been very useful, and his exclusion
-caused a lot of criticism at the time, and rightly so,
-too, we having the greatest respect for him as a
-bowler. Still, it is very easy to be wise after the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264">[264]</a></span>
-event. In our opponents’ second innings, wickets
-were always falling with fair regularity, thanks to
-Richardson putting in some sterling work, whilst
-Peel kept them playing. Darling, Giffen, and H.
-Trott, all of whom had done very well in the first
-innings, again played well, but the rest were very disappointing
-from a Colonial point of view, and the fact
-that a dust-storm made itself felt was scarcely a good
-enough excuse to account for the want of success on
-the part of so many. Richardson’s performance in
-taking six wickets for 104 was one of which he might
-well feel proud, but to thoroughly appreciate such
-work one should be on the spot, for there is a
-certain indescribable charm in watching such a man.
-C. T. B. Turner and J. T. Hearne, in the same
-manner, have always had their admirers. With 297
-left for us to get to win, our task was no light one
-for a fourth innings, and it became no easier when
-Brockwell was sent back after scoring 5. Next
-morning H. Trott succeeded in getting the skipper out
-l.b.w. from the first ball bowled, and our position
-became desperate. As all the cricketing world knows,
-Brown and Ward now made their never-to-be-forgotten
-stand, the first-named from the commencement
-of his innings going for the bowling in a manner
-which had seldom, if ever, been seen before on the
-Melbourne ground. Driving along the ground and
-over the in-fields’ heads, together with the short-arm
-hook of any ball at all on the short side, were his
-chief methods of scoring, and he treated all bowlers
-alike. Ward in the meantime was playing his usual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265">[265]</a></span>
-patient game, without failing to score whenever opportunity
-presented itself, and his effort was second only
-to Brown’s. Not until he had scored 140 was Brown
-sent back, and, disappointed as the spectators must
-have been, yet they could not resist giving him a
-splendid reception on his return to the pavilion.
-Ward, too, was equally well received when he had
-the misfortune to be sent back only 7 short of the
-century. With 30 odd runs only left to get to win,
-Peel and myself were together when the number had
-been scored. This was certainly one of the grandest
-matches ever witnessed, and for downright good
-cricket from both teams I place it in front of all the
-test matches in which I have taken part. If we had
-any luck in the game, it was in the Scotch mist on
-the last day of the match, which helped to put the
-dust together on the pitch, and enabled the wicket to
-play as well as it did on the first morning of the
-game. It was remarked by not a few at the time
-that seldom did the best batsmen all come so well
-out of the bag together on such an important occasion,
-and it certainly was exceptional that the five men
-in form should have scored as follows&mdash;the two
-innings being added together: Ward 125, Brown
-170, Stoddart 79, Peel 88 for once out, and myself
-140 once out.</p>
-
-<p>I have gone rather fully into details in regard
-to the 1894-95 tour in Australia, for the purpose of
-laying the foundation of my work. In 1896 it was
-the turn of our opponents to visit our shores, and
-H. Trott brought over a far better combination than<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266">[266]</a></span>
-many expected after reading the criticisms of some of
-the experts in Australia. It has always remained a
-mystery to me and many others why A. E. Trott
-was left behind, after all his good work against us in
-the Colonies, for he was in those days unquestionably
-a greater player than in any one of his English
-seasons’ cricket. The team did a great deal better
-than expected, for not a single county defeated them,
-although two out of the three test matches went
-against them. In H. Trott they had as fine a leader
-as ever captained an Australian, or, for that matter,
-any other team; never missing an opportunity
-throughout the many phases of the game, he had
-his men well in hand from the commencement of the
-tour, and his quiet manner, together with a never-ruffled
-temper, won him the esteem and respect of
-opponents and comrades alike; indeed, it is no
-exaggeration to say that no team from Australia
-ever pulled quite so well together as did that of
-H. Trott. Possibly Trott’s excellence as a captain
-lay in the fact that he always appeared to know
-exactly what bowler to use against each batsman,
-added to which, he never gave batsmen any presents
-of runs by having a fieldsman in a useless position.
-Although there was nothing very startling about the
-batting, yet it was very well balanced, no fewer than
-seven of the side obtaining over 1000 runs, in a
-season when the wickets in August were most difficult.
-Gregory, Darling, Hill, Iredale, Trott, and
-Giffen all had their admirers, whilst Kelly kept
-wicket in his best form throughout a long and trying<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267">[267]</a></span>
-tour; and but for coming immediately after such an
-artist as Blackham, more notice might have been
-taken of his excellent work. The variety of the
-bowling had not a little to do with the success of the
-team, always remembering how well it was handled,
-whilst we must not lose sight of the fact that each
-fieldsman had every confidence in the bowler, occupying
-at times the most daring positions under the very
-nose of the batsman, which often resulted in the
-downfall of a wicket, without the said fieldsman ever
-running much risk of an accident. The simple reason
-was that the bowler always knew what his men were
-working for, and never gave them away by an overtossed
-or by a short-pitched ball. The Australians,
-generally speaking, have always appeared to me to
-know better than we do how a batsman is the most
-likely to be defeated, and on their side there is more
-of that mutual understanding between bowler and
-fieldsmen that is so valuable. M’Kibbin, Trumble,
-Jones, and Giffen all took over 100 wickets, and if
-the first-named came out with the best analysis,
-Trumble took far more wickets, and could boast of
-never having a bad day, for if the wicket was suitable
-for small scoring, he never failed to do all that
-was asked of him, and if I had to name one for
-excellence of length, I should without hesitation
-name Trumble of all bowlers it has been my pleasure
-to see or play against. Jones’s pace secured for him
-many wickets, and if some expressed a view that his
-action was, to say the least, doubtful, there were
-others who considered his bowling on this tour fair,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268">[268]</a></span>
-and I certainly never saw anything wrong on the
-occasions on which I played against him in England.
-Giffen had the distinction of scoring 1000 runs and
-taking 117 wickets, a great achievement, considering
-the many times he has visited us. In fielding the team
-more than held their own, for Gregory at cover was
-always a treat to watch, whilst Iredale at the time
-had no superior in the out-field, and Hill and Darling
-possessed the safest of safe hands, in whatsoever position
-they were fielding. Added to this list of honour
-must be the name of Jones, who did many brilliant
-things at mid-off. In regard to returning the ball
-to the wicket from any part of the field, the Australians
-have always, since I have known them, given
-us a long start, the ball being returned more accurately
-and, what is equally important, more swiftly.
-We naturally have our shining lights in this respect,
-but as a team the Colonials show themselves off far
-better than do we in the field. In regard to the test
-matches, the first of the series, which was played at
-Lord’s, was rather peculiar, since our visitors, playing
-a long way below their proper form, were dismissed
-for 53 on a wicket which could have had little the
-matter with it, after the total of 292 made against
-them. Richardson and Lohmann were the two
-bowlers to carry all before them, but the aversion the
-Australians have always had to the ground at headquarters
-may have had not a little to do with the
-poor display of their batsmen. On our batsmen
-going to the wickets, those two sterling veterans,
-W. G. Grace and Robert Abel, after the dismissal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269">[269]</a></span>
-of Stoddart, played so finely that the game appeared
-to be at our mercy; but the tail end did not do quite
-so well as expected, and the total of 292 was the
-result. There was nothing in the bowling of the
-Australians worth commenting upon. It was in the
-second innings that our visitors showed such good
-form, when the game appeared too far gone to give
-them any chance of a win. All the more credit then
-to the captain and Gregory for their great stand of
-221, which caused their side to have a lead of 44
-runs with six wickets to fall after the dismissal of
-Gregory; and had the end batsmen taken as much
-getting out as usual, it is quite possible that they
-would have won, since there was a lot of rain on the
-second evening of the match. As it was, many of
-our supporters were dubious as to the result when
-we were set 111 to get to win, on a wicket which
-had been affected by rain. The runs, however, were
-hit off for the loss of four batsmen, thanks chiefly to
-Stoddart and Brown; but had all the chances been
-accepted, there is no doubt that the game would
-have been closer. Every one was delighted with the
-fine batting of Trott and Gregory, many being of
-opinion that it was the finest exhibition ever witnessed
-in a test match; the Englishmen, however,
-were very confident that Trott was caught by Hayward
-with his score at 61. This was the occasion of
-the crowd encroaching on the field of play, which
-handicapped our opponents not a little. The second
-test, at Manchester, resulted in a meritorious win for
-the Australians, after they had won the toss, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270">[270]</a></span>
-always appeared to hold the trump card in a game
-which was played throughout on a perfect wicket&mdash;in
-fact, a wicket after the heart of the Colonials.
-Thanks to Iredale, who started very shakily, but
-later played a beautiful innings, and Giffen, who
-played his usual game of soundness, a total of 412
-was run up against us. Iredale played a fine game
-for his side in compiling 108, most of his runs being
-obtained by crisp cutting and driving on the off side.
-With the exception of Trott, no one else bothered us
-much, in spite of the big total made against us.
-Richardson put in some of his best work in obtaining
-seven wickets for 168, bowling as he did no fewer
-than sixty-eight overs. Our batting in the first
-innings was as feeble as that of our opponents had
-been excellent, for with the exception of K. S.
-Ranjitsinhji and Lilley, who scored 62 and 65
-respectively, no one showed any form at all. The
-wickets were very equally divided amongst our
-opponents, of whom possibly M’Kibbin, who was left
-out at Lord’s, bowled best. Following on, the batting
-of the side again failed most ignominiously, with one
-exception, and that was the wonderful display of
-K. S. Ranjitsinhji, who scored no fewer than 154,
-and at the finish was not out. His performance was
-without doubt the finest in the match, playing as he
-was throughout his long stay at the wicket a losing
-game&mdash;and every cricketer knows what that means.
-His cutting and leg-glancing will never be forgotten
-by those who were lucky enough to be there. The
-miserable failure of all others, excepting Stoddart,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271">[271]</a></span>
-was inexplicable, since the wicket remained true
-throughout the game. M’Kibbin again came out
-with the best analysis, and had he played at Lord’s,
-we might not have won so easily as we did. On the
-Australians going in to get 125 to win, so well did
-Richardson bowl that the runs were not hit off until
-seven wickets had fallen, and when No. 9 batsman,
-in the shape of J. Kelly, joined Trumble, 25 runs
-were still required to win. One cannot speak too
-highly of the coolness exhibited by both men, who
-came through the trying ordeal most creditably.
-Richardson’s bowling performance in this innings
-will be remembered by all who can appreciate fine
-bowling, for, working his utmost for three solid hours,
-he took six wickets for 76 runs, on a wicket which
-remained good up to the finish, and I have always
-thought that this was one of the best things ever
-done by a bowler in a test match&mdash;all the more the
-pity that the combined effort of K. S. Ranjitsinhji
-and the Surrey express did not meet with its just
-reward of a win for the Old Country. The decider
-at the Oval naturally aroused a lot of enthusiasm,
-but unfortunately the weather was not propitious,
-a commencement not being possible until five o’clock
-on the first day. Our winning of the toss meant
-practically the winning of the game, for the pitch was
-in such a state of wet that it was all in favour of the
-batsmen, and when stumps were pulled up for the
-day 69 runs were on the board for the loss of W. G.
-Grace. Next morning the wicket was unplayable,
-with the result that Trumble carried all before him,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272">[272]</a></span>
-taking six wickets for 59, the majority of which were
-made on the previous evening, when the wicket was
-all against bowling and fielding, and I consider our
-opponents were justified in criticising the action of
-the umpires in commencing on the first evening. So
-badly did our men bowl on the treacherous wicket
-before lunch that 70 went up with Darling and
-Iredale unseparated. Afterwards Jack Hearne went
-right through the side, taking six wickets for 41,
-keeping an impossible length, and making the ball do
-just enough without too much. Peel really was the
-culprit before lunch, it being the only occasion on
-which I ever remember him failing to do well when
-all was in favour of the bowler. Darling played a
-fine game for his score of 47, and, thanks to his and
-Iredale’s effort, the Australians finished off their
-innings but 26 behind us. In our second innings
-Trumble again did what he liked, taking six wickets
-for 30, the whole side being out for 84. On the
-last morning of the match, with our opponents left
-with 111 to get to win, the pitch had dried considerably,
-but Hearne was always able to get enough spin
-on the ball to beat the bat, and the quick break was
-too much for the Australians. As Peel also bowled
-in his very best form, the result was one of the most
-extraordinary processions to and from the wicket by
-the batsmen, nine wickets being down with 17 only
-on the board. M’Kibbin, the last man, hit up 16,
-so that the total realised 44&mdash;and yet we are told that
-wickets are not broad enough! This match was the
-occasion of the professionals holding out for higher
-payment than £10, and then withdrawing from their
-position. That they had right on their side was
-proved by the increase of pay from that date in the
-test encounters, and it is not generally known that
-their request for higher payment was not sprung
-upon the Surrey committee at the very last moment.
-Considering the strain of these big matches upon the
-players, it cannot be said that they do not deserve
-the £20 now given to the professionals.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-375.jpg" width="400" height="600" id="i272"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A CRICKET SONG.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-376.jpg" width="400" height="645" id="i273"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A LYRIC OF THE CRICKET FIELD.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273">[273]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The second team that A. E. Stoddart took to
-Australia consisted of the following: A. E. Stoddart,
-K. S. Ranjitsinhji, J. R. Mason, N. F. Druce, A. C.
-Maclaren, T. Hayward, T. Richardson, J. Briggs,
-W. Storer, E. Wainwright, G. Hirst, J. H. Board,
-J. T. Hearne. On the eve of the first test, at Sydney,
-our troubles commenced, the trustees taking it upon
-themselves to postpone the match until Saturday,
-from Friday, the original date of the fixture. This,
-of course, they had no right whatsoever to do; in
-fact, the Melbourne Club telegraphed to the Sydney
-trustees that the game must take place on the original
-date fixed. Their sole reason for the postponement was
-to prevent disappointment to the up-country people,
-since there had been a lot of rain. We naturally were
-indignant at the decision, since it was made without
-any one being consulted on our side, and the first we
-heard of the postponement was during dinner on
-Thursday night, when one of us saw an announcement
-outside a public-house, to the effect that the
-match was put off. By putting the match off until
-Saturday, the trustees were making it absolutely a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274">[274]</a></span>
-game of chance, just what they said they were trying
-to avoid, since the captain who won the toss on Saturday
-would undoubtedly have put his opponents in
-first, and, with fine weather, the wicket on Monday
-would have been perfect for batting, after the Sunday
-intervening. As it happened, the pitch was quite
-fit to commence at twelve o’clock on Friday, the
-umpires being of that opinion. There is no doubt
-that the alteration was made solely for the purpose of
-the gate, and with no intention of doing us a bad
-turn. Still, it would have been better had those
-responsible for the blunder admitted their mistake
-at once, instead of trying to make stupid excuses, and
-giving ideas to the press which were scarcely complimentary
-to us. Owing to a merciful providence,
-it rained all Saturday, and consequently got the
-trustees out of a mess, the match being started on
-Monday on a perfect batsman’s wicket. Unfortunately
-our captain had the sad misfortune to receive a cable
-from home announcing the death of his mother on
-the Friday morning, which kept him out of all the
-test games, and naturally caused him to be unable to
-show anything approaching the brilliant form of his
-previous tour. The first test was an extraordinary
-walk-over for us, and yet we never looked like
-winning another game, so far as the tests were concerned,
-afterwards, unless we except the last game at
-Sydney. After Mason had been sent back cheaply,
-Hayward and myself stayed some considerable time
-together, and our stand was well followed up by
-Ranjitsinhji, 175, and Hirst, so much so that we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275">[275]</a></span>
-totalled 551. On getting our opponents in for the
-last one and a half hours on the second day, Richardson
-and Hearne bowled so well that, after the cheap
-dismissal of their best batsmen, they were never able
-to recover their lost ground, although Trumble and
-M’Leod made a magnificent effort at the finish of
-the first innings. Following on, 314 to the bad, the
-Australians did far better, Darling playing a grand
-innings of 101, whilst Clem Hill put together 86
-in his best style. The remaining batsmen played very
-disappointingly, with the exception of Kelly, the score
-reaching 408, leaving us 96 to win, which were hit off
-for the loss of Mason’s wicket. Ranjitsinhji played
-a wonderful innings, considering how ill he had been,
-only having got out of bed on the Sunday morning,
-when he went for a drive. He was just able to last
-out the hour’s batting he had on the Monday evening,
-and next morning played, especially towards the
-close of his innings, when his strength was leaving
-him, a regular forcing game. In the second test, at
-Melbourne, owing to the game being played on a
-new piece of turf, which the groundsman was most
-anxious to avoid, whatever chance we might have
-had was taken from us. The wicket opened out to
-such an extent that one could put one’s fingers into
-the cracks on the pitch, which meant that the ball
-was always doing something which it had no right to
-do, getting up or keeping low according to the angle
-at which it struck the crack. The Australians were
-very fortunate, under the circumstances, in winning
-the toss and batting on a perfect wicket on the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276">[276]</a></span>
-Saturday. They made such good use of their luck
-that 520 were scored, of which number C. M’Leod
-made 112, whilst Hill, Gregory, Iredale, and Trott all
-showed excellent form, scoring 58, 71, 89, and 79
-respectively. Our bowling was thoroughly collared,
-and even had the wicket remained good, I do not for
-a moment consider we were good enough to win,
-after the excellent start of our opponents. Our score
-of 315 was very creditable. As previously explained,
-the heat of the sun on Saturday and Sunday caused
-the ground to crack, the wicket previous to the test
-match having been covered up from the sun’s rays
-for a fortnight. Ranjitsinhji, Hirst, Storer, Druce,
-and Briggs all played well for their runs, although
-the ball kept getting past their defence occasionally,
-as was only natural. On our following on, with the
-wicket getting worse, we were all dismissed for 150,
-a small score for which we were prepared, Noble and
-Trumble only having to keep a length, whilst the
-wicket did the rest for them.</p>
-
-<p>At Adelaide, the strong light of which city our
-men dislike as much as the Australians take exception
-to the bad light of Lord’s, we went down before our
-opponents most decisively, they thoroughly outplaying
-us. Joe Darling opened the ball with a clipping
-innings of 178, his driving being very powerful
-throughout, and, as Hill scored 81 with him, the
-Adelaide people were rightly delighted with the success
-of their two men, the score eventually reaching
-573, of which Iredale again took 84 in his approved
-style. Hayward and Hirst alone of our men played<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277">[277]</a></span>
-good cricket, the total being 278 when all were sent
-back, Howell doing most of the damage on an
-excellent pitch. Following on, we did no better,
-Ranjitsinhji and myself being the only two to bother
-our opponents, who gained a meritorious win by an
-innings and 13 runs, proving beyond all doubt that
-we beat them at Sydney before the eleven had struck
-form, our first test in the Colonies generally being the
-least difficult to win, for this reason. Noble and
-M’Leod divided the wickets, and in the former our
-opponents had unearthed a bowler of the first order.
-It was very evident that they were now on the top
-of their form, and our chances of another win in the
-tests were not too rosy. At Melbourne the fourth
-test resulted in a further easy win for our opponents,
-after they had commenced their innings very inauspiciously,
-losing six wickets for 57, when Hill and
-Trumble dug their side out of a nasty hole, 165 being
-put on for the seventh wicket. Hill played his
-finest innings of the season; the fact that the total
-reached only 323, of which his contribution was
-188, speaks for itself, and it is quite possible that the
-South Australian was at his very best about this time.
-Trumble once again came to the rescue, and I cannot
-bring to mind any player who has so often come
-off at a pinch. Richardson and Hearne divided
-the wickets practically, and our bowlers did all
-that could have been expected of them. When
-it came to our turn to bat, every one appeared
-to be out of form, the total reaching 174 only.
-Whoever was put on to bowl, a wicket resulted,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278">[278]</a></span>
-the batting being feeble in the extreme. Following
-on, we did very little better, as those who
-appeared to get going were sent back when we were
-commencing to hope for better things, and our
-opponents had no difficulty in obtaining the required
-number, 115, to win, losing two wickets in the process.
-In this match we were completely outplayed,
-after we had obtained a flattering start, and I have
-not the slightest hesitation in saying that this combination
-was well in front of any other against which
-I had played in the past, even as it was in front of
-the team that we met in 1901-2. Sydney appeared
-more to our liking than did other places, if our
-cricket was any criterion, for we certainly did better
-on this ground, which has not quite the same fiery
-life possessed by other Colonial grounds. In the last
-test our form was better, since, on winning the
-toss, we put together 335, and then dismissed our
-opponents for 96 less, Richardson putting up a
-capital performance by obtaining eight wickets for
-94 runs. We completely broke down in our second
-innings, being all disposed of for 178, Trumble and
-Jones doing the mischief. As our opponents had
-276 to get to win, the match was by no means lost,
-so far as we were concerned, and as we got M’Leod
-and Hill out at once, our hopes were raised, but
-Darling soon put the issue beyond doubt, hitting out
-most viciously from the commencement of his innings,
-although it should be mentioned that, with his score
-at 40, our fast bowler, as well as the wicket-keeper,
-was confident he was out l.b.w. But the umpire<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279">[279]</a></span>
-thought otherwise. On the other hand, Ranjitsinhji
-was given out l.b.w. for an appeal from point, when
-he was most confident he played the ball&mdash;a misfortune
-which, coming as it did immediately after my
-dismissal, had a great bearing on the result of the
-game. But I in no manner wish to insinuate that
-the umpire made a mistake in either case. At the
-finish our opponents won handsomely by six wickets,
-a very meritorious victory, once more proving, if
-any proof was required, that they could extricate
-themselves from any position, however difficult; and
-only a really great side is able to do such a thing
-with consistency. Their performances of this tour
-in Australia were so full of merit that I, for one,
-began to doubt our ability to beat this little lot in
-our own country, and was not slow to communicate
-my fears to better men than myself on my return; so
-that the result of the next Australian tour in England
-came as no surprise to most of us.</p>
-
-<p>When Darling brought over the same team which
-defeated us in Australia, a good time, so far as their
-cricket was concerned, was predicted by all of us
-who had knowledge of their excellence in their own
-country; and after the first test match, played at
-Birmingham, it was admitted on all sides that we
-had not exaggerated their merits. On winning the
-toss in the first game, it took them a whole day to
-compile 252, which slow and over-careful play just
-cost them the match. Hill, Darling, Noble, and
-Gregory all played well against a not very powerful
-bowling combination, and more runs ought to have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280">[280]</a></span>
-been made. Of our lot, Ranjitsinhji and Fry alone
-played good cricket, and our opponents were able
-to claim a lead of 55. On going to the wickets a
-second time, they put together 230 for eight wickets,
-when they declared; and but for Ranjitsinhji, who
-played a perfect innings in his own inimitable style,
-the Australians would have won, the Sussex amateur
-carrying his bat for 93. At Lord’s there were many
-changes&mdash;too many, I should say; for Jessop, Townsend,
-Lilley, Mead, and myself took the places of
-W. Gunn, Storer, Hirst, J. T. Hearne, and W. G.
-Grace, the latter having telegraphed for me. On
-winning the toss on a fast wicket, we were all out to
-Jones before we could turn round, with the exception
-of Jessop and Jackson, who made 51 and 73 respectively,
-the total reaching 206, a poor one on that
-fast wicket. Owing to Hill and Trumper, who
-fairly collared our bowling, our opponents collected
-the big total of 421 against us, the two named
-scoring 135 each, Trumper being left to carry his
-bat. Both played magnificent cricket, and with the
-exception of Noble, 54, no one else did anything. In
-our second venture we did little better, scoring 240,
-Hayward, Jackson, and myself alone doing anything,
-the wickets being divided up amongst five bowlers,
-thus showing the variety of attack at Darling’s disposal.
-The 28 required to win were hit off without
-loss, and from this point onwards to the end of the
-tour our opponents preferred to play not to be beaten
-rather than to lay themselves out for a win, and
-under the existing conditions one could scarcely<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281">[281]</a></span>
-blame them. At Leeds, on a wet wicket, the
-Australians were disposed of for 172, Young bowling
-extremely well, but with provoking bad luck,
-since he beat the bat times without number without
-hitting the wickets. Worrall hit well for his 76,
-but the boundary was far too short a one, some of
-his mis-hits going over the heads of our out-fields.
-Briggs was seized with an attack after the first day’s
-play which unfortunately kept him out of the field
-for more than a season, and we were much handicapped
-in the second innings of our opponents, when
-our first two bowlers required a rest. They were
-unable to get it, however, and Trumble and Laver
-pulled the match out of the fire; and if both were
-in difficulties at times, they played a fine game for
-their side. Hearne bowled in magnificent form, as
-also did Young. Owing to rain, there was no play
-on the last day, when we required 158 to win, with all
-our wickets to go down. Hill was unable to play any
-more cricket after this match, being in the hands of
-the doctor. At Manchester&mdash;thanks to a wonderfully
-sound innings on the part of Hayward, who scored
-130 when things were not looking too rosy for us,
-an effort that was well backed up by Jackson and
-Lilley&mdash;we scored 372, and on our opponents going
-to the wickets, owing to Bradley bowling with much
-fire, they were cheaply dismissed for 196. Young,
-who was suffering from a bad knee, took four of the
-remaining wickets. Following on, with our bowlers
-literally fagged out, it was not surprising to find our
-opponents masters of the situation, scoring 346 for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282">[282]</a></span>
-seven wickets, when they declared. Worrall, Darling,
-Trumper, and Noble played in their best form, the
-latter in particular playing a great game for his side,
-but a game which, owing to its slowness, was not
-appreciated by the large crowd, disappointed with
-the turn the match took. With an hour left for
-play, our batsmen went in to have a hit, for the sake
-of giving the crowd a change, and it was surprising
-to find so many people weighing up our chances on
-what took place in that last hour’s play, which ought
-to have been ignored. This was the third drawn
-game out of the four matches played, and those of
-us who knew the manner in which that Oval wicket
-had been pampered with patent stuffs, etc., thought
-it the last ground in the world to finish a test match
-on in three days, with one side laying itself out not
-to be beaten. We compiled the huge total of 576,
-and as the last six men had instructions to be out in
-less than an hour, one might well have wondered
-what the score would have been had all got as many
-runs as possible. Hayward again played a fine innings
-of 137, and Jackson was at his best for 118,
-185 being put up for one wicket, a record by 15 for
-a first-wicket stand in a test match, W. G. Grace
-and Scotton having held it up to that time. At the
-end of the day’s play 435 appeared on the board for
-the loss of but four batsmen. Next morning, however,
-each player had to get out to give our bowlers a
-chance, if we were to win the match. Our opponents
-did well in scoring 352, after their somewhat trying
-experiences of the day previous. Gregory played a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283">[283]</a></span>
-masterly innings of 117, and with his captain, who
-made 71, saved his side from a defeat, when nothing
-better than a drawn game awaited them. Lockwood,
-who had been more or less a cripple throughout the
-season, showed us all what we had missed by our
-inability to play him by taking seven wickets for
-71 on this perfect pitch, bowling no fewer than
-fifty overs, a performance which caused his leg to
-give way again, and which prevented him from
-letting himself go in the second innings, when our
-opponents always appeared to have the game saved.
-But had Worrall been caught early on, it is possible
-we might just have got home. In the last half-hour
-the wicket commenced to go, but it was too late for
-our chance, although Rhodes in that time bowled
-beautifully, taking three wickets in very quick succession.
-At the drawing of stumps our opponents had four
-wickets still to fall, and were 30 runs on. So ended
-the tour, and out of five test matches no fewer than
-four were left drawn. It is not astonishing to find
-so many who are to-day playing for England wishing
-for fewer test games, and to have them played out;
-and yet the same order of things continues, gate-money
-alone, so far as can be gathered, standing in
-the way of a much-needed alteration in the test
-games.</p>
-
-<p>In the autumn of 1901 the Australians honoured
-me with an invitation to collect a team, but owing to
-the action of the Yorkshire committee in not allowing
-their professionals to accept my invitation, the
-bowling question was made a most difficult one for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284">[284]</a></span>
-me to tackle. Thanks to all other county committees
-giving me all assistance possible, a side was
-collected, and had one of our bowlers, in whom I
-had every confidence, only remained sound, it is quite
-possible that we might have come back victorious,
-for, after winning the first test at Sydney, we had
-the match at Adelaide three parts won when Barnes
-broke down at a time when the wicket had crumbled
-badly at one end, and when he was the only one who
-could hit the spot. On that occasion the two left-handers,
-who made all the runs, if we except a fine
-innings of Trumble, were the only two who could
-have put us down, owing to this spot being, of
-course, on the wrong side of the wicket for their
-batting, looking at it from a bowler’s point of view.
-At Sydney we headed our opponents on the first
-innings in the fourth test, and in the last match, at
-Melbourne, we only went down by 32 runs, after
-having to bat on a wet wicket. That we were
-unable to stay our games out, especially in the later
-stages of the tour, was scarcely surprising, since we
-were practically without two of our bowlers for more
-than half of the time, which meant that those who
-were left had far more trundling than was conducive
-to their strength. In the first of the tests, at Sydney,
-thanks to a good start on our part, we ran up a total
-of 464, Hayward, Lilley, Braund, and myself all
-getting going. On our opponents going to the
-wickets, so well did Barnes bowl, as also Braund
-and Blythe, that only 168 runs were on the board
-when the last man was sent back. Following on,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285">[285]</a></span>
-our opponents scored but 4 more than in the first
-innings, and we were left easy winners, Braund and
-Blythe bowling as well as they ever did in their lives.
-Before the match at Sydney commenced, Blythe unfortunately
-sprained his hand, but it was not until that
-game was finished that he really felt any pain. The
-leading surgeon in Australia advised rest for some considerable
-time, but the Kent professional thought that
-the hand would not suffer much, especially taking into
-consideration the fact that the wicket was all against
-long scores, so he took his chance in the second test at
-Melbourne. On winning the toss, I decided to put
-our opponents in, and had Barnes been able to bowl
-in the mud only half as well as he had previously
-done on the fast wickets, our opponents would not
-have scored 100. As it was, they only put together
-112, but Blythe found that spinning the ball gave
-him all the pain which the doctor had predicted he
-would suffer, and Barnes bowled very short throughout,
-notwithstanding the fact that he took six wickets
-for 42, which really was not a great performance on
-that unplayable wicket. When our turn came to bat,
-our effort resulted in 61, of which Jessop claimed 27.
-Before the day was finished we got rid of five of our
-opponents in their second innings for 48, and had
-none the worst of the match. Next morning, however,
-with some of the best batsmen still to come in,
-Hill played on the top of his form on what was now
-a batsman’s wicket, scoring 99 before Braund beat
-him, whilst Duff, who had batted out and out the
-best in the first innings, went one better by scoring<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286">[286]</a></span>
-104 in his first test match, both players being seen
-quite at their top game. Had a chance been accepted,
-Armstrong, who helped Duff to add 120 for the last
-wicket, would not have received a ball. After our
-early wickets fell, rain made it impossible for the
-remaining batsmen to make a fight of it, although
-Tyldesley played fine cricket for his 66. It is only
-fair to state that, rain or no rain, our opponents
-always appeared to have the game safe after luncheon
-on the second day. Noble in our first innings took
-seven wickets for 17, making the ball do everything
-but talk, whilst his performance in the second innings
-was very little inferior, when he captured six for 60.
-Trumble, who bowled an excellent length, took the
-remaining wickets in both innings. In the third
-test, at Adelaide, a lot of runs were obtained, considering
-the wicket was by no means perfect; but
-the bowlers on both sides were not seen at their best,
-from various causes. Noble was suffering from a
-strain, and Trumble was far from himself, which had
-a good deal to do with our total reaching 388, out
-of which number Braund, who played a beautiful
-innings, scored 103, whilst Hayward was also at his
-best in compiling 90, and Quaife chipped in with a
-very useful 68. Our opponents replied with 321,
-Hill coming out best with 98, being well backed up
-by Trumper 65 and Gregory 55. Of our bowlers,
-Barnes broke down, after bowling seven overs, at a time
-when he looked very dangerous; but Gunn came
-along in great style, taking five for 76, and Braund
-also did well. After obtaining 200 for five wickets<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287">[287]</a></span>
-in our second innings, a dust-storm, which did us no
-good, but which brought enough rain to eventually
-do the wicket good, stopped play for the day.
-Continuing, we added another 40, Barnes being
-unable to bat and Trumble bowling in good form.
-Wanting 315 to win, our opponents, thanks to the
-two left-handers, who made 166 between them, and
-a fine effort on the part of Trumble, claimed a great
-victory by four wickets; but we were very unlucky
-in losing the services of Barnes, who on that wicket
-could not have helped bowling well. It should not
-be overlooked that the left-handers were batting on
-a good wicket, whereas right-handers had to face a
-crumbled spot outside the off stump. At Sydney we
-again claimed a lead on the first innings, Hayward,
-Tyldesley, Lilley, and myself all getting runs, whilst
-Saunders, Trumble, and Noble divided the wickets.
-On the second day Jessop, bowling at a great rate,
-succeeded in getting four good men caught in the
-slips; but Noble and Armstrong mended matters
-next morning. In our second innings, with a lead of
-18, we went out one after the other in most surprising
-fashion before the bowling of Saunders, who
-carried all before him on a perfect pitch, our effort
-resulting in the paltry total of 99. Our opponents
-had no difficulty in making 121 for the loss of three
-wickets. In the last match, at Melbourne, on a
-difficult pitch, we disposed of our opponents for 144,
-Hayward and Gunn meeting with success. We
-replied with 189, thanks to Jessop, Braund, and
-Lilley, but Trumble was too much for most of us.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288">[288]</a></span>
-In their second innings our opponents pulled themselves
-together, and with Hill and Gregory in form
-the total reached 255; and as more rain fell on our
-going to the wickets, our task was a difficult one. In
-the end we had to put up with a defeat by 32 runs,
-our total of 178 being very creditable under the
-circumstances, since we had much the worst of the
-wicket, on which Noble was seen at his best. Thus
-ended a tour which was not too successful from our
-point of view; but with the exception of one match,
-all the test games were very close ones, and it was
-admitted on all sides that no team ever fielded in
-more brilliant style than did ours. Jessop did some
-marvellous bits of work in every match, whilst
-Jones, Braund, Tyldesley, and Quaife all were at
-their best. Lilley did his work well behind the
-wickets, but was unfortunate in this respect, that if
-he made a mistake, which wicket-keepers are bound
-to do, it was generally a costly one.</p>
-
-<p>The team which Joe Darling brought over in 1902
-was, in my opinion, not quite so strong as some of
-us thought, although nothing like so weak as some
-people in Australia tried to make us believe. Possibly
-they had the best of the luck in regard to the
-weather in the big matches; but there was no getting
-away from the fact that whatever the fates gave them
-they made the very most of, never allowing a chance
-to slip through their fingers in any of the games in
-which I played against them. There was no fortune
-in losing the services of Trumble for the first six weeks
-or so of the tour, in consequence of an accident at the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289">[289]</a></span>
-nets, which necessitated a free use of Noble in the
-bowling department in the early matches. At Lord’s,
-too, during what little took place, they were far from
-themselves, as far as their health was concerned; but
-from that match to the finish of the tour they never
-looked back, and it is quite possible that the reappearance
-of their reliable bowler, Trumble, was a far better
-tonic than any of the medicines they were taking for
-influenza. In regard to the bowling, Darling may not
-have had too much, but the variety, together with the
-consistent good form of those bowlers at his disposal
-on the wet wickets, was quite sufficient to dispose of the
-best batsmen playing against them in all the matches
-of the tour. Jones could scarcely be expected to do
-well on the wet wickets, and naturally his figures
-are nothing like so good as on previous occasions.
-Trumble always made it as near a certainty as possible
-that few runs would be made against him, provided
-the wicket gave him the slightest assistance, thanks
-to his accuracy of length, together with his wonderful
-knowledge of each batsman pitted against him, which
-he used to the full, and to me he appeared to bowl
-almost better than ever. If Noble was not quite so
-consistent as previously, he can excuse himself on the
-ground of the extra effort required at the commencement
-of the tour in the absence of Trumble;
-but when he was to be caught at his best, as in the
-test at Sheffield, he carried all before him, and I still
-think he bowls a more difficult ball than any other
-bowler to-day. That Saunders was included was a
-very good thing for our opponents, since his great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290">[290]</a></span>
-break from leg on the wet wickets made it very
-difficult for the batsmen to score off him, even if his
-length was indifferent, as was the case at Manchester
-in the test game, when it was impossible to get him
-away on the leg side of the wicket. In his case it
-was a triumph for the selectors, since, with one
-exception, his performances in Australia scarcely led
-one to believe that he would do so well as was the
-case. Howell was far from well, added to which
-he was the recipient of most painful news from his
-home, which was quite sufficient to prevent him from
-showing any of his old brilliance. The fielding of
-the team was of the greatest use to the bowlers, since
-mistakes were few and far between. Hill, Hopkins,
-and Duff, in the out-field, were very safe, whilst their
-return of the ball to the wicket was, as usual, most
-accurate and far ahead of our style. Of the others,
-Noble at point was very clever, and Gregory was as
-neat and clean in the picking up and return of the
-ball as ever. Joe Darling handled his team admirably
-throughout, whilst the entire absence of discord,
-together with the many denials of pleasures which
-one and all underwent, proved how well he was fitted
-for his post. Of the batsmen, Trumper stands right
-out by himself, and I can pay him no higher compliment
-than saying he has only done what I have
-always thought he was good enough to do. His
-cutting of the ball, which was always placed to beat
-the fieldsman at third man, was admirable, as was his
-hooking, chiefly by wrist work, of the short ball.
-His driving, too, was not the least conspicuous<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291">[291]</a></span>
-feature of his batting. The pace he always went at
-at the very start of his innings frequently demoralised
-the bowler, and to his rapid commencements, especially
-at Manchester and Sheffield, in the second innings, do
-I ascribe the poorness of our attack in the majority
-of the test games. Hill played many fine innings,
-but I thought he was a great deal more aggressive,
-for which his defence had to suffer, causing the
-bowlers less difficulty than used to be the case in
-obtaining his wicket, although I do not wish to
-insinuate that he is not now one of the world’s
-greatest batsmen. Darling lost a little of his old form,
-although he gave us flashes of his former brilliance,
-as in the test match at Manchester. May be the
-cares of captaincy told on him slightly, at which I
-do not wonder. Noble was only just beginning to
-enjoy himself with the bat when the tour was at an
-end, although he made 284 against Sussex, the highest
-score of the season. Of the new men, Duff proved
-himself to be a capital man to accompany Trumper
-to the wickets, being possessed of excellent defence,
-with a slicing sort of cut which brought him in many
-runs. Hopkins takes all the risks of an Englishman,
-being specially fond of the hook stroke, and it is safe
-to predict that he will continue to improve, although
-he would be the first to admit that, if he is to bowl,
-it must not be until several others have failed first.
-Armstrong did well all round, adopting a somewhat
-defensive game, with an occasional straight drive, very
-powerfully executed, and if he has a weak stroke it is
-the ball between his legs and the leg stump that he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292">[292]</a></span>
-does not care about. Kelly was really excellent
-behind the stumps, and if occasion arose he was
-generally good for some runs. A great feature of
-his wicket-keeping was his absolute fairness of appeal;
-and this remark applies to the whole team. In regard
-to the test games I do not intend to write much, since
-they are all still fresh in our memory. The weather
-was very unsatisfactory, the two first games being
-drawn, whilst in the three finished games, at Sheffield,
-Manchester, and the Oval, rain was of no use to our
-chances of a win, generally managing to come at the
-wrong time for us; but this is all in the game. Had
-it remained fine, I feel very confident that three days
-would not have been sufficient to finish the matches;
-and in my opinion the addition of half an hour, which
-necessitated the luncheon interval being taken at 1.30,
-handicapped the bowler, since 4-1/4 hours were left for
-play afterwards&mdash;a very long spell when no interval
-for refreshments was allowed. A rest, however, was
-agreed upon later, with good results too, as the bowler
-generally obtained his wicket after the interval. The
-first test, at Birmingham, ended disappointingly, for
-after a very poor start on our part, which Tyldesley
-and the Hon. F. S. Jackson set right, we scored 376
-for nine wickets, when we declared our innings closed.
-Tyldesley played a fine forcing game for 138, and
-from the time when the Hon. F. S. Jackson and he
-got together, everything went right for us, Hirst,
-Lockwood, and Rhodes all playing excellent cricket.
-Owing to the rain which followed our innings, our
-opponents had very little chance of drawing level,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293">[293]</a></span>
-but no one was prepared for the poor display of
-their batsmen, the whole side being sent back for
-36. Rhodes did what he liked with his opponents,
-although the ball was not turning to any great extent,
-as the wicket was quite on the wet side, and by no
-means unplayable. The Australians adopted a hitting
-game, but the first attempt at a drive, no matter
-whose it was, ended disastrously, without exception.
-Hirst also did well, his three wickets costing 15.
-Rhodes had the excellent analysis of seven wickets
-for 17, his bowling being very accurate, whilst he
-suited his pace to the wicket admirably. Owing to
-more rain, only half an hour more play took place,
-the Australians losing two wickets for 46. There
-is no doubt in my mind that our opponents were
-nowhere near their proper form at this time, and
-that the team without Trumble was something like
-cod-fish without oyster sauce. At Lord’s there was
-another disastrous start, which righted itself, when
-copious rain put an end to further play. At
-Sheffield we had a great game. Our opponents,
-winning the toss, did fairly well in compiling 194,
-Noble making the highest score, 47, whilst Barnes,
-who came in for Lockwood, bowled best of our
-men on a wicket possessed of considerable life. It
-suited his style of bowling admirably, and he took
-six wickets for 49. Braund did what little he had to
-do very well, commencing by clean bowling Trumper
-for 1. It has been stated that a grave mistake was
-made in leaving Lockwood out; with those of that
-opinion I do not agree&mdash;and no one has a higher<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294">[294]</a></span>
-opinion of the Surrey bowler than myself. In the
-week before the test match he secured but two
-wickets, and one of those occasions was the match
-against Lancashire, whilst the other game was that
-against Yorkshire. It was not Lockwood at all
-who bowled at Old Trafford. At the end of the
-first day’s play we had scored 102 for five wickets,
-but owing to a sharp shower in the night, the wicket
-was soft on the top the next morning, and our last
-five men added but 43. After the heavy roller had
-been over the pitch it played beautifully, all devil
-having been taken out of it, which made the one
-man Barnes, who had been so successful in the first
-innings, practically harmless, since he has never been
-seen to advantage, in big cricket, with the fire out of
-the wicket. Hill and Trumper went along at a
-great pace, all our bowlers catching it, F. S. Jackson
-securing both their wickets, but not until Trumper
-had made 62 and Hill 119. Well as both men
-played, the bowling in this innings, as in the first
-innings at Manchester, was, to say the least, very
-moderate. With the exception of Hopkins, no one
-of the remaining players caused much trouble, Rhodes
-finishing up by taking four wickets in 19 balls. But
-those of us near the wickets knew why, for F. S.
-Jackson, who had kept an excellent length for some
-time at that end, suddenly made two balls nip back
-very quickly, and then the left-hander was immediately
-brought on. In fact, the moment the
-wicket broke up at that end, Rhodes made full use
-of his opportunity, as did the Australians when they<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295">[295]</a></span>
-got us at the wickets, Noble on the last day, from
-the end which Rhodes had bowled, being every bit
-as difficult, and taking six wickets for 52. It was
-only due to Jessop’s hitting that we scored 195. As
-I had the luck to stay there as long as any one, I
-know what I am writing about, and I have no hesitation
-in saying that the wicket suddenly went all to
-pieces from the moment that Jackson made the ball
-turn quickly. Noble also did this to some purpose,
-making it kick up, too, very sharply, as on the
-occasion when Jackson was bowled off his chest.
-In our second innings I do not blame our batsmen
-in the least. Noble was seen at his best in both
-innings, whilst Saunders did as well as he in the first
-innings.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296">[296]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-400.jpg" width="400" height="303"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER X</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">UNIVERSITY CRICKET</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">Home Gordon</span> and <span class="smcap">H. D. G. Leveson-Gower</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">To</span> thousands who have never been near the banks
-of the Cam or the Isis, “the ‘Varsity match” forms
-one of the episodes of each recurring year. It is a
-social festival; perhaps, also, it is the last great
-manifestation of cricket as a game, and not as a
-money-making business, which is to be found among
-first-class fixtures. But the University match is more
-than this, for it is the Mecca of all who have gone
-down from Oxford or Cambridge, the opportunity
-for the renewal of former acquaintances, possibly the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297">[297]</a></span>
-only occasion when you come across those who were
-amongst your greatest friends in the day of <i>arcades
-ambo</i>. It is good to meet old comrades, good to
-hear the ring of the old jests, good to see how time
-is treating those who are your own contemporaries&mdash;ay,
-and good to give one kindly thought to those
-who have drifted to all the quarters of the Empire,
-and to remember those who have been removed from
-us by Death.</p>
-
-<p>The University match is, however, more than an
-excuse for reunion. It is the battle of the “Blues,”
-the struggle between eleven picked representatives
-of Oxford and the eleven contemporary delegates
-of Cambridge. All old University men, and all the
-undergraduates of to-day, with their families, relations,
-and friends, young and old, unite in shouting
-for their own side. It is as cheery a display of
-enthusiasm as one could care to show to that hypothetical
-individual, “the intelligent foreigner”&mdash;the
-foreigner one really encounters being “a chiel amang
-us takin’ notes” for hostile purposes. But little care
-we for international complications when Blue meets
-Blue. It is a grim, grand struggle for mastery, and
-some illustration of the evenness of the fight can be
-gathered from the fact that after sixty-eight contests
-Cambridge should only lead by four.</p>
-
-<p>But the value of the University match exceeds all
-yet indicated, for it is the supreme and unsullied
-manifestation of genuine amateurism. When cricket
-is degenerating into a business, when too many eke
-out a pseudo-amateurism in unsatisfactory ways, when<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298">[298]</a></span>
-individuals play for their averages and sides play
-against the clock, we hail the University match as
-the recurrent triumph of the true amateur, the
-keenest, manliest, most entrancing, and most spirited
-match of the year&mdash;and likewise the one haloed by
-the richest traditions. All these views are apt to be
-forgotten when county committees are clamouring
-for valuable Blues to neglect their University trial
-matches in order to help their shires in championship
-fixtures. That is why this article is heralded by a
-pæan of genuine enthusiasm, and it is this that we
-would say to undergraduates in years to come&mdash;you
-may represent your county as long as your purse and
-your skill permit, but no living man can participate
-in thirty-six matches for Oxford or for Cambridge,
-nor more than four times meet the opposing Blues.
-Therefore, take University cricket as the happy fruit
-of early manhood, and believe that nothing in after
-years is quite equal, quite identical with its delightful
-experiences.</p>
-
-<p>With these preliminary observations concluded,
-let us first see where the game is played. Of course
-the University struggle is at Lord’s, and probably
-every one who reads the present volume, even if he
-has not been himself to headquarters, has a pretty
-good idea of what the ground is like. Even in the
-last twenty years it has undergone a number of
-changes in order to bring it to the level of latter-day
-requirements. Of course the original picturesqueness
-of the surroundings has been impaired. The present
-pavilion has been ingloriously compared to a railway
-station. The extension of the grand stand has
-rendered all the north side unsightly, and the huge
-mound at the south-east corner looks like part of the
-auditorium at Earl’s Court. Even the tennis-court
-has been shifted. But all said and done, 15,000
-people can get a decent view of the game at Lord’s,
-and the turf itself has been improved beyond measure.
-Time was when the pitch at Lord’s was proverbially
-treacherous, and old scores bear eloquent testimony to
-this. To-day a superb wicket can be provided for a
-big match, one equal to any in England, despite the
-fact that comparatively few drawn games take place
-at St. John’s Wood.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-403.jpg" width="400" height="255" id="i298"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc27" summary="c27">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Aquatint by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Francis Jukes.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>SALVADORE HOUSE, TOOTING, SURREY.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>After a Drawing by John Walker, end 18th Century</i>).</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-404.jpg" width="400" height="184" id="i299"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc28" summary="c28">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Drawing</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>by Crowhurst.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>CRICKET GROUND, TODMORDEN.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299">[299]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>So much for the meeting-place. Now for the
-trial-grounds of the rival Blues. In this respect,
-Oxford had far more difficulty than their rivals. The
-earliest grounds used by the Dark Blues were those
-of the Bullingdon Club and of the Magdalen College
-School. The Bullingdon ground, on the site of
-the present barracks, was at a goodly distance from
-the town, but possessed some of the finest turf in the
-kingdom. The Magdalen ground was a part of
-Cowley Common, and this was the first enclosure ever
-leased to the Oxford University Cricket Club. With
-a few individual digressions, there the bulk of the
-home fixtures were contested until, in 1881, the
-University settled down on its own admirable ground
-in the University Parks. A hard, fast pitch could
-be obtained, in a central situation, with an excellent
-practice-ground always available, while a commodious
-pavilion, exactly behind the wicket, affords those in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300">[300]</a></span>
-authority, and the legion who love to give gratuitous
-advice, an admirable position from which to watch
-the trial matches. Though not as yet dealing with
-the fixtures, it may be broadly stated&mdash;without fear of
-contradiction&mdash;that the Oxford eleven has displayed
-far more cohesiveness since it has acquired a permanent
-establishment. Of course the fact that no
-gate-money can be taken militates against the quality
-of the professionals engaged on the ground-staff. It
-is a rule that only one home fixture shall have a
-charge for admission, and then the match is played on
-one of the College grounds, generally Christ Church,
-which affords the greatest accommodation. When
-the Australians come, their game is invariably the
-one selected. In other seasons it is usually a county
-match.</p>
-
-<p>Cambridge have been far more fortunate in the
-matter of a ground. The University originally
-played on Parker’s Piece&mdash;a huge village green;
-but in 1848, at the instigation of Lord Stamford and
-Lord Darnley, who considered the ground too public,
-as well as the tradition that the M.C.C. refused to
-appear again, because of the ill-mannered chaff of the
-spectators, F. P. Fenner induced the University to
-move to his spacious ground. The original pavilion,
-not built until 1856&mdash;and then at the trifling cost of
-£300&mdash;was replaced in 1875 by a handsome structure
-on which over £4000 has been expended. The University
-eventually obtained Fenner’s on an admirable
-lease, and the ground can be regarded as one of the
-finest in the country. Level and true, the pitch does<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301">[301]</a></span>
-not take the heart out of a batsman, while a bowler
-obtains all reasonable assistance. In estimating
-modern University cricket, it may be fairly considered
-that all undergraduates have every opportunity to
-train up to the best possible standard to which they can
-attain, and that, so far as expenses and wickets are
-concerned, they have, in the phrase of Mr. W. S.
-Gilbert, “nothing whatever to grumble at,” either at
-Oxford or Cambridge.</p>
-
-<p>In the view of the writers of the present section,
-there is no need to dilate at great length on the
-earlier history of the cricket at the two Universities.
-The old matches have been replayed by a score of
-pens since the stumps were originally drawn. I am
-not saying they were not as admirable as those of
-later years&mdash;indeed, I would at a pinch rather argue
-on the other side. But I do believe that those who
-will read the present volume take more interest in
-the cricket of the last twenty-five years than they feel
-in that of previous generations. Therefore it is not
-from want of appreciation that I deliberately incur
-the charge of treating in a condensed form the early
-battles of the Blues. Were a volume at my disposal,
-instead of a chapter, I would gladly act in a very
-different fashion.</p>
-
-<p>The University match was at first a friendly game
-rather than a serious contest. Numbers of people
-would be surprised at being told that Oxford had
-not always met Cambridge at Lord’s. But though
-the first match took place at St. John’s Wood in
-1827, no less than five have been fought out at<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302">[302]</a></span>
-Oxford, either on the Magdalen, Bullingdon, or
-Cowley Marsh grounds, four of which were won
-by the home side. To this may be appended
-the following indications of the haphazard nature
-of the game. In 1836, when there had been no
-University match for six years, Cambridge lost by
-121 runs, with two men absent; why, no contemporary
-troubled to set forth. In 1838 began the regular
-succession of annual encounters, but in a game won
-easily by Oxford there was one man absent in three
-out of the four innings. Next year, when Cambridge
-won by an innings and 125 runs&mdash;the top score in
-an aggregate of 287 being 70 by Mr. Extras, followed
-by 65 by Mr. C. G. Taylor&mdash;the losers not only
-played one short throughout the match, but history
-does not even give a reason, nor does tradition state
-who the eleventh man should have been. Of the
-46 wides sent down by Oxford, it was said, “the
-bowlers evidently at times lost their temper at not
-being enabled to disturb the wickets of their
-opponents.” But the greatest proportion of extras
-had been in 1836, when these amounted to 63 in
-Oxford’s second total of 200, and 55 in Cambridge’s
-first of 127, with 149 extras in an aggregate of 479.
-Against this must be set only 24 extras in an
-aggregate of 751, a creditable feature of the game of
-1885.</p>
-
-<p>Among the early giants for Oxford may be cited
-Mr. Charles Wordsworth, subsequently Bishop of
-St. Andrews, who bowled fast left-hand lobs twisting
-in from the off. To him appears to have been due<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303">[303]</a></span>
-much of the organisation of the big match. The
-earliest cricketer from Oxford chosen to play for the
-Gentlemen was Mr. H. E. Knatchbull. A good many
-of the Dark Blue triumphs mid-way in the ‘forties
-were ascribed to the very fast round-arm bowling of
-Mr. G. E. Yonge, who, in five matches <i>v.</i> Cambridge,
-removed the bails thirty times, in all capturing forty-three
-opponents. This is the parallel of the terrific
-devastation wrought by that very fine bowler, Mr.
-A. H. Evans, who sent back thirty-six Cantabs for 13
-runs apiece, twenty-two being clean bowled. Admit,
-too, the prowess of Mr. G. B. Lee, who in 1839
-took nine of the ten wickets and scored a fifth of the
-Oxford aggregate. He was for many years Warden
-of Winchester College, and his death, which occurred
-on 29th January last, was deeply lamented by a great
-host of friends. The first of the cricket “families”
-who have made immortal names in University cricket
-was the Riddings. When two of the brothers played
-for Gentlemen <i>v.</i> Players in 1849, the elder long-stopping
-and the younger wicket-keeping to such
-tremendous bowling as that of Mr. G. E. Yonge and
-Mr. Harvey Fellowes, tradition says that nothing
-was seen like it until Mr. Gregor MacGregor put on
-the gloves to take the bowling of Mr. S. M. J. Woods.
-In 1849 the Gentlemen won by an innings and 40
-runs, the biggest victory until 1878, and one mainly
-due to the Oxonian combination.</p>
-
-<p>The next family was that of the Marshams, a
-triumvirate whose achievements have been mentioned
-by every successive generation of Oxonians, and to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304">[304]</a></span>
-which Cambridge could offer no parallel until the era
-of the Studds. Mr. A. Payne was a very fast bowler;
-so was Mr. Walter Fellowes. Among batsmen come
-Messrs. Reginald Hankey and W. H. Bullock, but
-towering above them stands Mr. C. G. Lane, whose
-name is enshrined among the pristine heroes of the
-Oval. Nor prior to 1860 must the prowess of Mr.
-Chandos Leigh, Mr. Arthur Cazenove, and Mr. W.
-F. Traill be forgotten.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-411.jpg" width="400" height="285" id="i304"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>CRICKET AT RUGBY IN 1837.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-412.jpg" width="400" height="229" id="i305"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS PLAYING CRICKET IN 1842.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_305" id="Page_305">[305]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The Light Blue giants up to this time had also
-been notable. The earliest of great fame is Mr. C. G.
-Taylor, a batsman of great repute, an old Etonian,
-who was an adept at nearly every sport. With
-him must be associated Mr. J. H. Kirwan, a very
-fast amateur bowler, “with a low delivery which
-approached a jerk, but was allowed.” No matter
-how he was hit, he persisted in keeping his fieldsmen
-behind the wicket, ready for catches. Mr. T. A.
-Anson appears to have been the earliest of the
-famous Cambridge stumpers, but his renown pales
-before that of Mr. E. S. Hartopp, “the only man
-who could stop the famous fast deliveries of Mr.
-Harvey Fellowes with any degree of certainty.”
-What that meant on the old-time bad wickets may
-be estimated by the fact that, when there was some
-discussion about pace, it was the unanimous consensus
-of those old enough to judge that Mr.
-Fellowes had never been equalled for lightning
-speed. Eton provided the next Cambridge bowler of
-importance, Mr. E. W. Blore, whose pace was slow,
-with an excellent length. More famous, of course, is
-Mr. David Buchanan, who in his University days was
-a fast left-handed bowler. By the way, he himself confessed
-that he would not remain a fortnight “kicking
-his heels about” in order to play in the University
-match of 1851. His marvellous prowess with the
-ball was altogether apart from his undergraduate
-career, though he captured six Oxonian wickets in
-1850. Mr. Mat Kempson, who hailed from
-Cheltenham, was a clever fast bowler, with so much
-spin on his ball that he was the only cricketer
-George Parr could not hit to leg. It is said that
-while he and Canon J. M’Cormick were together,
-they never lost an eleven-a-side match at Cambridge.
-The feat of Mr. M. Kempson and Sir Francis
-Bathurst, bowling unchanged for the Gentlemen
-against the Players, has only been equalled by the
-two Cantabs, Messrs. S. M. J. Woods and F. S.
-Jackson, in 1894, and by A. H. Evans and A. G. Steel,
-who, in the Gentlemen <i>v.</i> Players match in 1879,
-dismissed a strong side of players for 73 and 48,
-both being then in residence at their Universities.
-Mr. E. T. Drake, with bat and lob bowling, was
-esteemed by his contemporaries as only second to
-Mr. V. E. Walker.</p>
-
-<p>The name with which Cambridge cricket will be
-historically associated in the nineteenth century is
-that of Mr. Arthur Ward. He weighed 20 stones
-when he played for Cambridge, and was so much
-chaffed by the crowd at Lord’s that in 1854 he
-managed the match from the pavilion. But to him
-is due the acquisition of Fenner’s, where he reigned<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_306" id="Page_306">[306]</a></span>
-as an autocrat, despotic but delightful. He has been
-even as much to his old University as Mr. Thomas
-Case, wise, vigilant, and full of foresight, has been to
-Oxford cricket. The twain will never be forgotten,
-and unborn generations should breathe benedictions
-upon them.</p>
-
-<p>Two successive secretaries of M.C.C. represented
-Cambridge in 1854. One was that delightful
-personality and sturdy hitter, Mr. R. Fitzgerald.
-The team he took to America in 1872 was the
-parent of many tours in many climes, all enjoyable,
-if not of such public importance as the great expeditions
-to Australia. He was succeeded at Lord’s
-by his friend of many years’ standing, Mr. Henry
-Perkins, who is to-day cheery in his honoured
-retirement after twenty-one years’ work, the full
-value of which was not entirely appreciated by the
-younger generations of M.C.C. until afterwards.
-In his day he must have been a keen good cricketer,
-and, considering how little he watched the modern
-game, and then always behind the pavilion windows,
-it is marvellous how he could so skilfully diagnose
-the skill of players. His kindness to quite young
-fellows fond of the game is one of those traits to
-which enough justice was not done at his retirement,
-possibly because the tributes came from older friends.
-It may be noted that Mr. T. W. Wills, who represented
-Cambridge <i>v.</i> Oxford in 1856, was never in
-residence. The group of cricketers who went up
-from Brighton College will always be memorable.
-In 1860 for Cambridge appeared Messrs. G. E.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_307" id="Page_307">[307]</a></span>
-Cotterill, Denzil Onslow, A. E. Bateman, and E. B.
-Fawcett, as formidable a quartet as could be desired.
-Mainly owing to the spinning slow bowling of Mr.
-H. M. Plowden, the Cantabs won by three wickets
-on a soaking ground, with two of the best Oxford
-men too unwell to play.</p>
-
-<p>The next eighteen years can be regarded as the
-mid-Victorian section of University cricket. Preeminent
-from 1862 to 1865 was Mr. R. A. H.
-Mitchell, then absolutely the finest amateur bat in the
-country. He averaged 42 in seven innings against
-Cambridge, though his highest innings was only 57.
-He was a wonderful bat, timing the ball with something
-of the judgment of “W. G.,” though, like the
-champion, he was <i>never</i> quite happy facing Alfred
-Shaw. Possibly no other amateur ever hit so well to
-leg, and he has the distinction of being the earliest of
-the great captains who developed the game according
-to our modern ideas. It was he, too, who gave
-Oxford four successive victories after four previous
-reverses. After he went down, Oxford had no star
-for some seasons, except that Sir Robert Reid proved
-as nimble behind the sticks as he has since been
-successful at the Bar and in Parliament.</p>
-
-<p>Cambridge in the same period had more men of
-mark. At the outset there were the erratic but
-devastating deliveries of Mr. T. Lang, who captured
-in all fifteen Oxford wickets for 84 runs, and for his
-University has the magnificent figures of forty-six
-wickets at a cost of 5.54 apiece. Then too flourished
-Lord Cobham, of whom Mr. Clement Booth&mdash;a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_308" id="Page_308">[308]</a></span>
-veteran not given to rash assertions&mdash;states, “He was
-absolutely the best all-round cricketer I ever played
-with.” Note that Mr. Booth actually participated in
-first-class cricket&mdash;fine steady bat that he was&mdash;until
-1887, and still keeps up his interest in the game.
-To collaborate with these three were Messrs. H. M.
-Marshall, A. W. T. Daniel, H. M. Plowden, an excellent
-slow bowler, and W. Bury, “who never missed
-a catch.” Truly was it said that the 1862 eleven was
-not surpassed until that of 1878. It will be noted
-that Cambridge was now enjoying the era of the
-Lytteltons, G. S., the second brother to Lord
-Cobham, coming up in 1866, and showing wonderful
-nerve in a trying finish in the following year. It
-was then the turn of the Light Blues to win for
-four successive encounters. Much of this was due
-to the great command of that eccentric free-lance
-Mr. C. A. Absalom over the ball. He was outside
-all laws of cricket convention, among other ethics of
-his being that a half-volley on the leg stump was the
-best delivery with which to attack a fresh batsman.
-Altogether he took one hundred wickets for 14 runs
-each as an undergraduate, and twenty-two wickets
-for 247 runs in his three encounters with Oxford.
-Of course he was utterly unorthodox as a bat too,
-but his hard hitting produced quite a respectable
-figure in the average-sheet of the Light Blues. Of
-his acrobatic agility in the field, it is safe to say that
-never will its like be seen again.</p>
-
-<p>Slightly senior to him was Mr. C. E. Green, the
-father of Essex cricket, and hardly had he gone<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_309" id="Page_309">[309]</a></span>
-down than Cambridge possessed one of the most
-remarkable groups of attractive players to be noted
-in our annals. This was in 1869&mdash;known, by the
-way, as the University wicket-keepers’ match, as
-the two stumpers, H. A. Richardson and W. A.
-Stewart, between them annexed fourteen out of the
-forty wickets. In that year Messrs. C. I. Thornton,
-W. Yardley, J. W. Dale, W. B. Money, H. A.
-Richardson, and C. A. Absalom all played for the
-Gentlemen. Of these, the repute of Mr. C. I.
-Thornton as a stupendous hitter has not even been
-dimmed by that of Mr. G. L. Jessop himself. For
-about thirty years “Buns” went in to slog, and
-undoubtedly succeeded. Some day, perhaps, when
-feats of hard hitting are collected, an adequate
-catalogue of his amazing feats may be presented.
-They will certainly prove unparalleled, and if others
-have hit as hard, possibly no one ever <i>drove</i> with
-such mighty impetus. Nor, in even this brief allusion
-to his connection with University cricket, must it be
-forgotten what service he annually rendered in collecting
-strong scratch teams for his visits. It should
-be put on record that his two fine scores of 50 and
-36 were made against Oxford in 1869 by steady
-defensive cricket.</p>
-
-<p>Of “Bill of the Play,” it is difficult for us, who
-never saw him bat, to adequately write, when so
-many of our readers have been more fortunate. A
-very eminent judge, however, supplies this note:&mdash;“Yardley
-comes next to ‘W. G.’ among amateurs.
-Ranji may have produced new strokes, notably that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_310" id="Page_310">[310]</a></span>
-astounding ‘hook,’ but his physique never gave him
-that impressive <i>command</i> over the ball which was the
-characteristic of the elder Cantab. Yardley possessed
-all the grace of Palairet, with a strength equal to
-that of Ulyett. I should regard him as the perfection
-of really beautiful batting accompanied with remarkable
-power. He played all round the wicket, but he
-was stronger on the leg side than modern bats.”</p>
-
-<p>To Mr. Yardley belongs the unique distinction
-of having made two centuries in the University
-match, 100 in 1870 and 130 in 1872, the former
-being the first made in the game&mdash;oddly enough,
-at a time when he was supposed to be out of form&mdash;and
-the latter the highest, until Mr. K. J. Key passed it
-with his 143 in 1886. Mr. J. W. Dale was a stylish,
-pretty bat, while Mr. W. B. Money, besides being a
-clever lob bowler, was a good and often aggressive
-bat, though from nervousness he failed to do himself
-justice against the rival Blues. To all generations
-of cricketers, the Oxford and Cambridge match of
-1870 will be known as “Cobden’s game,” despite
-the first recorded century. It was also true that the
-hat trick had also never been performed in the
-match, and Mr. F. C. Cobden now achieved it under
-almost miraculous conditions. Mr. Cobden bowled
-a good fast ball of the average type, nothing marvellous,
-and it is this one feat which has immortalised
-him. Oxford had a fine eleven, the match being a
-genuine battle with giants on both sides. The Dark
-Blues, to begin with, possessed in Mr. C. J. Ottaway
-one of the coolest and most skilled of defensive<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_311" id="Page_311">[311]</a></span>
-batsman. He belonged to the race of University
-stonewallers (the apotheosis of which was Mr. Eustace
-Crawley, who was an hour at the wicket without
-scoring, and in his second innings was another hour
-before he “broke his specs,” amid stentorian applause,
-only to be out with the very next ball, though the
-year before he had scored a century). Mr. A. T.
-Fortescue was an excellent, watchful bat, Messrs.
-Pauncefote and Townshend were useful, Mr. Walter
-Hadow a dangerous run-getter, and Mr. E. F. S.
-Tylecote a sound, clever batsman, and so fine a
-wicket-keeper that he has put on the gloves creditably
-in test matches. Moreover, that good bowler,
-Mr. C. K. Francis, was a bat that had to be reckoned
-with. On fourth hands Oxford needed 179 to win,
-and with Messrs. Fortescue and Ottaway scoring
-steadily, and Mr. Tylecote playing good cricket, the
-match looked a very hollow affair, despite the excellent
-bowling of Mr. E. E. Harrison-Ward.</p>
-
-<p>Over the concluding incidents there is some conflict
-of evidence, but it seems probable that the fact
-of an extension of the playing time having been
-agreed to affected the finish, the light becoming bad.
-When Mr. Ottaway was dismissed, Oxford needed
-19 to win, with five wickets to fall. Subsequently
-Messrs. Townshend and Francis were sent back, but
-only 4 runs were required, with three wickets to fall.
-Then came Mr. Cobden’s sensational and renowned
-over. Off the first ball, Mr. F. H. Hill, who was
-well set, made a vigorous stroke which was so well
-fielded by Mr. A. Bourne that only a single was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_312" id="Page_312">[312]</a></span>
-scored. Off the second ball Mr. S. E. Butler was
-sharply annexed by the same opponent. Mr. T. H.
-Belcher was bowled by the next delivery, and it is
-even now controversial whether clean or off his pads.
-Finally, in came Mr. W. A. Stewart, who was, under
-the circumstances, naturally extremely nervous, and
-the victorious bowler at once removed his bail, amid
-a scene of frantic excitement.</p>
-
-<p>Wonders now come in battalions, for in the very
-next University encounter was performed another feat
-never again or before achieved in this especial match.
-This was the capture of all ten wickets on a side.
-Whether much of the success was due to the ground
-is beside the question. The fact remains that Mr.
-S. E. Butler took all the ten Cantab wickets at a cost
-of 38 runs, and then claimed five more for 57. He
-was a fast bowler, who on this occasion found a spot
-which made the ball keep very low, and on a difficult
-pitch he was absolutely unplayable. Oxford this
-season had the benefit of the fine batting of Lord
-Harris, the man who, next to Lord Hawke, has
-probably done more for cricket than any one else.
-He was a stylish, attractive bat, with brilliant strokes
-and great driving power. Few batsmen have performed
-better against fast bowling; but his prowess
-ripened by his association with Kent rather than in
-his University days. Still, the Cantabs possessed the
-bulk of the new cricketers. Mr. W. N. Powys, a
-rather fast left-handed bowler, had the splendid
-figures of twenty-four wickets for 153 runs, while
-the two Etonians, Messrs. George Longman and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_313" id="Page_313">[313]</a></span>
-A. S. Tabor, acquired high repute as batsmen. The
-former was the more attractive, comparable in a later
-generation to Mr. Norman Druce, while the latter,
-though more cramped, also might have been the
-more difficult to dislodge. In 1872, both being
-freshmen, they were the earliest who ever put up a
-century for the first wicket in the University match.</p>
-
-<p>The next triumph of Oxford came in 1875.
-This was due to Mr. A. W. Ridley, whose lobs were
-preternaturally successful at the crisis. Both sides
-carried men famed in the game. Mr. A. J. Webbe
-has in some measure occupied a unique position.
-Apart from his high repute as a batsman, he has
-devoted himself with assiduity to cricket at both
-Oxford and Harrow, in many ways materially influencing
-cricket, apart from his illustrious connection
-with Middlesex. Others to be noted were Mr.
-Vernon Royle, possibly the grandest field who ever
-donned flannels, Mr. W. H. Game, a big hitter, apt
-to prove disappointing, and Mr. T. W. Lang, who,
-besides being an admirable bowler, had trained into
-a very useful bat. Mr. Ridley as a bat, too, was a
-delightful exponent of the best Etonian traditions.
-Cambridge, however, enjoyed the services of some
-wonderful cricketers. In his quiet, patient, yet admirable
-method, how few can have excelled Mr.
-A. P. Lucas! Seven-and-twenty years after the
-match in question, a junior among the last Australian
-team expressed his opinion that Mr. Lucas was
-among the first flight of English batsmen of to-day.
-One critic has judiciously remarked that he never<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_314" id="Page_314">[314]</a></span>
-attempts to place a ball, or he would have scored
-three times as many runs, but for sheer accuracy
-who can ever have surpassed him? A colleague was
-Mr. Edward Lyttelton, most famous but one of all
-the family&mdash;a fine bat, remarkably free, a magnificent
-field anywhere, with heart and soul in the
-game. Mr. F. F. J. Greenfield, unorthodox but
-capable, was another useful man, and the bowling
-rested mainly on W. S. Patterson.</p>
-
-<p>The sensation of the match in which all these
-participated was in the close finish. Cambridge,
-needing 174 to win, had reached 161 for seven
-wickets, everything having gone in their favour
-until Mr. Webbe caught out Mr. Lyttelton in the
-country, a catch which many judges still watching the
-game think was the finest they ever witnessed. Mr.
-W. H. Game persuaded his captain, Mr. A. W.
-Ridley, to go on with lobs at this crisis. “It was
-much against my own judgment. My first ball got
-rid of W. S. Patterson; then Macan came in and
-made a single off the next. This brought Sims to
-my end, and he hit my third ball clean over my head
-for four. Lang then bowled against Macan, who
-kicked a leg-bye, and afterwards a no-ball made it
-seven to win. It was now that Sims was caught, and
-Arthur Smith came in. He looked rather shaky,
-and no wonder. He managed to keep his wicket
-intact for two balls, but my third bowled him, amid
-terrific excitement.” Thus Mr. A. W. Ridley himself,
-in reply to the request for his own reminiscence
-for an article in the <i>Badminton Magazine</i>. His<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_315" id="Page_315">[315]</a></span>
-modest impression deserves to be resurrected here.
-Mr. Edward Lyttelton has stated that the ball with
-which the victorious lob bowler dismissed each of his
-victims was “a straight low one on the leg stump
-which did not turn an inch.” Of the match in 1876
-it may be stated that Mr. W. S. Patterson was the
-first “centurion” to be undefeated, and Mr. W. H.
-Game, the first Oxonian to run into three figures
-against Cambridge, though in the following year his
-example was followed by Mr. F. M. Buckland. It
-may be pointed out that Oxford from 1871 to 1875
-and Cambridge from 1876 to 1880 each won four
-victories, interrupted by one defeat. In 1876 each
-University had won an equal number of matches.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a></p>
-
-<p>1878 was the first year of modern cricket as
-generally accepted, but it was hardly more notable
-for the first visit of the Australians than for the
-unrivalled ability of the Cambridge eleven. They
-played eight matches, and won them all, a result as
-much due to magnificent fielding as to any other
-cause. Of course the phenomenal agency was the
-marvellous skill of Mr. A. G. Steel, but this great
-exponent of every department of the game was
-admirably backed up by the whole side. They
-opened by defeating Mr. C. I. Thornton’s eleven,
-which included Dr. W. G. Grace and his younger<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_316" id="Page_316">[316]</a></span>
-brother, as well as Mycroft and Midwinter, by 79
-runs, though 90 runs behind on first hands. Single-innings
-victories were gained over M.C.C. and the
-Gentlemen, while Yorkshire was disposed of by a
-margin of ten wickets. Migrating to the Oval,
-Surrey fell to the tune of an innings and 112, while
-M.C.C., strongly represented at Lord’s, were left in
-a minority of 106. Although Messrs. A. J. Webbe
-and A. H. Evans appeared for Oxford, the University
-match was felt to be one-sided, and so it proved.
-Mr. A. D. Greene took four hours and ten minutes
-to get 35 runs, while in the second effort Messrs. A.
-G. Steel and P. H. Morton sent the whole side
-back for 32. Finally the Cantabs, though deprived
-of the great services of Mr. A. P. Lucas, beat the
-Australians before lunch on the second day by an
-innings and 72 runs. In emphasising this startling
-succession of victories, it ought to be pointed out
-that only once did opponents exceed a total of 127,
-and then the aggregate was only 193, while six sides
-were dismissed for less than 70 runs apiece.</p>
-
-<p>Now for the doughty team which Mr. Edward
-Lyttelton led so admirably. Be it noted that he was
-the only Englishman who in 1878 scored a century
-against the Australians. To him, and to Mr. A. P.
-Lucas, allusion has already been made. To do adequate
-justice to the great game always played by
-Mr. A. G. Steel is beyond our pens. Suffice it to
-say that the true panegyric lies in his magnificent
-record. In connection with Cambridge in 1878, he
-headed both tables, taking seventy-five wickets for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_317" id="Page_317">[317]</a></span>
-7 runs apiece, and averaging 37 for an aggregate of
-339. At that time his bowling was incomparably
-difficult, mainly because of the way he used to vary
-his “pitch and break.” Never did any attack need
-such careful watching. His batting, of course,
-reached its climax in that superb 148 <i>v.</i> Australians
-at Lord’s in 1884, and its most brilliant piece of fireworks
-when he went in ninth at Scarborough, and
-scored a century while the others made 7. But it
-was not even his skill which made Mr. A. G. Steel so
-great. It was his masterly and inspiriting confidence,
-together with an unparalleled grasp of the game,
-which made him the greatest amateur after “W. G.”
-that we have looked on.</p>
-
-<p>Following him must come Mr. Alfred Lyttelton,
-a great wicket-keeper, who would have been greater
-still, had he not appeared in the transition stage
-between long-stopping and standing up to the
-bowlers. He was also a really free and attractive
-bat, who could force the game well. Mr. P. H.
-Morton would nowadays be regarded as only a
-medium-paced bowler, whose difficulty arose from
-the speed at which his ball came off the pitch, whilst
-it was doing a great deal. His career in cricket was
-practically bounded by his time at Cambridge, in
-connection with which his bowling will always be
-worthily remembered. Mr. Herbert Whitfeld
-proved somewhat of a stonewaller type, shaping
-with admirable correctness, and in the field has
-known no superior. Hon. Ivo Bligh (now Lord
-Darnley) only lacked good health. As a bat he was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_318" id="Page_318">[318]</a></span>
-an almost perfect exponent of Etonian traditions, so
-long as he could play forward. We are of opinion
-that his cutting was at times harder than that of any
-other amateur. Mr. D. Q. Steel had his days; batsmen
-of his reckless temperament must have a heavy
-percentage of failures. But for fine play all round
-the wicket, when he was in the vein, he could be
-commended as a positive peril to any opponents.
-Mr. A. F. J. Ford could hit “high, hard, and
-often,” bowl a useful change, and catch opponents in
-the slips with the facility and length of reach subsequently
-displayed by Tunnicliffe. Mr. L. K. Jarvis
-was an attractive bat, but was a good deal more
-dangerous on a fast wicket than a slow. Finally,
-Mr. F. W. Kingston, who could put on the gloves
-with considerable credit, was a sound, careful bat, who
-used to play the old “draw” stroke with notable
-ability. But after all, it was the cohesion and the
-fielding which made 1878 <i>the</i> Cambridge eleven <i>par
-excellence</i>.</p>
-
-<p>Not much noteworthy happened in 1879, a season
-that maintained its unpleasant record for wetness and
-chilliness until 1902 relegated all previous experiences
-into mere episodes. But 1880 saw the Studds following
-the Steels and Lytteltons into the Cambridge eleven.
-There was always an element of uncertainty about Mr.
-G. B. Studd, but he was often a really brilliant bat
-and brilliant field at cover-point. As for Mr. C. T.
-Studd, he is the greatest amateur between Mr. A. G.
-Steel and Mr. S. M. J. Woods. Few men have ever
-played cricket with such accuracy. Those who have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_319" id="Page_319">[319]</a></span>
-seen J. T. Hearne pitch ball after ball with mechanical
-precision at Lord’s can realise how Mr. C. T. Studd
-used to bowl, only slower. His batting was never
-perhaps so sound as that of Mr. C. B. Fry, but that is
-the nearest contemporary type; only the style of Mr.
-Studd was one absolutely satisfactory to witness. The
-game sustained a national loss when he left it to
-undertake missionary labour in Asia. Mr. J. E. K.
-Studd, who came into the Cambridge eleven a year
-later, thus establishing a record of three brothers all
-simultaneously playing for their University, was never
-so good as either of the others, but he was a hard-working
-cricketer, and a difficult bat to dislodge, while
-his punishing powers were of no mean order.</p>
-
-<p>In 1881 both teams were powerful, the public
-opinion that Cambridge were far the stronger being
-quite properly reversed. Three innings of the match
-were moderate, principally because the Cantabs all
-drew away from the fast bowling of Mr. A. H.
-Evans, who claimed thirteen wickets for 10 runs
-apiece. But the grandest feature was the innings of
-107 by Mr. W. H. Patterson, who carried his bat
-clean through the second Oxford innings, although
-suffering from a badly-injured hand. It was one of
-the greatest innings ever played at Lord’s, and foreshadowed
-the fine service he subsequently rendered
-to Kent. That brilliant disappointment, Mr. C. F. H.
-Leslie, whose phenomenal batting at Rugby evoked
-anticipations never realised, played a splendid innings
-of 70, his partnership with the old Harrovian arresting
-the succession of Cantab victories, which were<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_320" id="Page_320">[320]</a></span>
-destined to be resumed for the next two years. A
-conspicuous Oxonian recruit was Mr. M. C. Kemp,
-a capital wicket-keeper, and a most lively, not to say
-venturesome, bat, and a wonderful judge of a run.
-But it was his exciting personality and wonderful
-enthusiasm which made him of such moral value to
-any side. That attractive Wykehamist bat, Mr.
-A. H. Trevor, unfortunately elected to watch rather
-than to play cricket after he went down from
-college.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-429.jpg" width="400" height="247" id="i320"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc29" summary="c29">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Water-Colour, attributed to</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>G. Cruickshank.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE CORINTHIANS AT LORDS IN 1822.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_321" id="Page_321">[321]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>1882 saw a striking contrast between the treatment
-meted out to the two Universities by the
-greatest of all Australian teams. Mr. Murdoch’s
-combination opened their campaign on the Christ
-Church ground, and the Colonial who took first ball
-scored 202. This was that magnificent batsman,
-Mr. H. H. Massie. Mr. E. D. Shaw alone of the
-home side could offer much resistance, as was also
-the case in the first innings against Cambridge.
-Although this match was on 15th May, ten Oxford
-blues were on the home side, the eleventh man being
-that energetic, if erratic, bowler, Mr. C. J. M.
-Godfrey. Cambridge gave a vastly different exhibition.
-Mr. C. T. Studd signalised his first appearance
-against an Australian eleven by scoring 118 and
-taking eight wickets. The triumvirate of brothers
-were responsible for 297 out of 393 from the bat,
-and thus had a large share in the triumphant victory
-by six wickets, the only defeat of the Colonials till
-11th August. The slow bowling of Mr. R. C.
-Ramsey, an old Harrovian, himself a Queenslander,
-had also much to do with the success, for he claimed
-twelve wickets for 179 runs. On 17th August, for
-the first time, Cambridge Past and Present met the
-Australians, and, after one of the most spirited
-contests, effected a victory by 20 runs. The bowling
-of Mr. A. G. Steel and Mr. C. H. Alcock&mdash;who
-never obtained his blue&mdash;and fine batting by Mr.
-Alfred Lyttelton against Messrs. Spofforth and Boyle
-at their deadliest, were the main agencies. That
-phenomenal 66 of Mr. G. J. Bonnor, compiled in
-half an hour with four sixes and six fours, was one of
-the most astounding things ever perpetrated in cricket.
-The University match was a good one, including a
-really artistic 120 from Mr. G. B. Studd, fine form
-in both departments from his more illustrious brother,
-and an innings of great force from one of the hardest
-hitters who ever played at Lord’s, Mr. Henery, a
-man of iron strength though diminutive physique.
-Lord Hawke, then merely an energetic and interesting
-bat, was not in his University days so valuable a
-cricketer as afterwards. Indeed, his powers steadily
-ripen with years, and in 1902, at the age of forty-two,
-he batted at the Oval in grander style than ever
-before, although down at Taunton they say his 126
-against Somersetshire was the best innings of all.
-Long may he continue to advance. The day of his
-retirement will prove a sad blow to cricket throughout
-the country. On the Oxford side, Mr. J. G.
-Walker was nothing like the fine bat to which he
-afterwards trained on, but at point he has rarely been
-matched, save by Dr. E. M. Grace.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_322" id="Page_322">[322]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Though Cambridge won in 1883, the side was by
-no means phenomenal. Mr. C. W. Wright, who
-was remarkably effective during his residence at
-Trinity, was the “centurion,” and Messrs. C. T.
-Studd and C. A. Smith were responsible for the
-attack. The latter was a vigorous, bustling cricketer,
-whose curious method of approaching the wicket has
-rarely been emulated. Of the Oxonians the most
-notable newcomer was Mr. H. V. Page, a bat with
-fine nerve, and an equally fine “pull” stroke, keen
-field, and by no means bad bowler, perfectly indifferent
-to punishment. Considering that the phenomenally
-stubborn Mr. C. W. Rock obtained his blue in 1884,
-most imperturbable of bats, and destined a year or
-two later to be about the best contemporary amateur
-bowler (of moderately medium pace, be it mentioned),
-and further, that two notable county captains, Messrs.
-H. W. Bainbridge and F. Marchant, both old Etonians,
-came into the eleven, it is hard to say why Cambridge
-was so poor. But the fact remains, they were somewhat
-of a slack side, and neither of the Etonians was
-then the masterly exponent of batting which in diverging
-ways they subsequently became. Oxford had a big
-repute, including the sensational presence of Mr. (now
-Sir) T. C. O’Brien, who, having gone into residence
-solely to get his blue, had the memorable misfortune
-to bag a brace. Mr. B. E. Nicholls, a senior
-from Winchester, was perfectly extraordinary in the
-slips; against the Australians, for example, he nipped
-no less than seven catches. But the comparative
-falling off of the two Universities can be gathered<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_323" id="Page_323">[323]</a></span>
-from the fact that no one from either team represented
-the Gentlemen against the Colonials in either
-match, though three Oxonians were on the victorious
-side against the Players at Lord’s.</p>
-
-<p>The Cambridge victory of 1885 was due to some
-Oxonian half-heartedness in shaping at Mr. C.
-Toppin at the outset, and to a partnership of 142 by
-Messrs. C. W. Wright and H. W. Bainbridge, who
-just ran into the coveted three figures. Cricket was
-played to a different tune next year, when two great
-Oxonians effected a stand of 243. The heroes of
-this were Mr. K. J. Key and Mr. W. Rashleigh.
-The burly successor to Mr. J. Shuter as Surrey
-skipper was in his third year, and at that time was a
-singularly fine bat. It may be confidently asserted
-that no other amateur of the present generation has
-so triumphantly exploited the “pull,” and he played
-the game with cheery energy. Mr. Rashleigh, who at
-Tonbridge had been as sensational as Mr. Leslie a
-few years before at Rugby, did great things for Kent,
-but nothing better than this fine display. Those
-who note with bewilderment that no one else ran
-into double figures in the Oxonian total of 304
-ought to be told that the side purposely played
-themselves out. Finely as Mr. Bainbridge again
-played (his scores were 44 and 79), his side was
-hopelessly unsuccessful, but the absurdity of playing
-Mr. C. M. Knatchbull Hugessen remains to all time
-the biggest blunder in University selection, for there
-was already a deft stumper in Mr. L. Orford. Both
-that match and a year later that genial sportsman and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_324" id="Page_324">[324]</a></span>
-capable cricketer, Mr. E. H. Buckland, bowled best
-for victorious Oxford.</p>
-
-<p>The match of 1887 is known as “the last choice
-game.” The eleventh place in each team was only
-filled at the latest possible moment. The Light Blue
-final selection, Mr. Eustace Crawley, scored 33 and
-103 not out, and the Dark Blue one, Lord George
-Scott, contributed 100 and 66. Oxford fielded
-superbly, and their new wicket-keeper, Mr. H.
-Phillipson, was absolutely one of the finest who has
-ever donned the gloves, and it is a great pity that his
-impetuosity and tremendous punishing powers overpowered
-his otherwise remarkable capacity as a bat,
-which at Eton caused him to be regarded as exceptionally
-excellent. Deplorably weak bowling on
-both sides left the Light Blues in the minority only
-because of their liberality in the matter of dropped
-catches.</p>
-
-<p>In 1888 Cambridge obtained the assistance of two
-amateurs whose combined services will be remembered
-as long as the game is played. These were of course
-Messrs. Gregor MacGregor and S. M. J. Woods.
-Undoubtedly in his prime the Scotchman has never
-had a rival among amateur wicket-keepers, except
-Mr. Blackham. The way he used to take Mr. S. M.
-J. Woods, the way too in which he handled the
-deliveries of Mr. C. J. Kortright for the Gentlemen,
-will never be forgotten by those who witnessed
-them. He was also a stubborn bat, who came off
-when things were at their worst, and he remains one
-of the distinguished cricketers of his lengthy period.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_325" id="Page_325">[325]</a></span>
-Even more emphatically can this be remarked of Mr.
-S. M. J. Woods. The value of his bowling may be
-gathered from his analysis in his seven University
-innings, when his victims were 36, at a cost of under
-9 runs apiece; moreover, for Cambridge he annexed
-190 opponents at a cost of 14 runs each. To say
-that he was a terror is but to be truthful. His great
-break back, in combination with great pace, with a
-magnificent slow ball, made him for many years
-unrivalled as a fast bowler. A magnificent field,
-gathering the ball as he rushed in to meet it, and a
-great hitter, in those days somewhat less judicious
-than when so serviceable to Somersetshire, he combined
-all the aptitudes of a redoubtable cricketer.
-As a combination of bowler and wicket-keeper, in
-University cricket, Messrs. Woods and MacGregor
-have no parallel. But as often happens, the two stars
-gathered some notable men into their constellation.</p>
-
-<p>Senior among these must be named Mr. F. G. J.
-Ford, youngest and best cricketer in a family of
-sportsmen. Like all big hitters, more especially
-perhaps left-handers, he was uncertain. During his
-four years at Cambridge he was not, except at
-Brighton, the terrifically punishing bat he subsequently
-became. But he was in those days a very
-useful bowler, as well as a formidable run-getter.
-Mr. R. C. Gosling, an excellent bat of the Eton
-type, actually was not dismissed by Oxford until his
-third University match, a curious feat for a man
-going in seventh. Another Etonian bat, but
-essentially fast wicket player, was Mr. C. P. Foley,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_326" id="Page_326">[326]</a></span>
-who fairly won the match of 1891 by his steadiness.
-An even better bat was Mr. R. N. Douglas, whose
-play was freer than subsequently for Middlesex,
-and who was always attractive. Mr. E. C. Streatfield
-would have taken prominent rank, had he really
-cared more for the game. Batting with a trace of
-the style which made him a capital racquet-player, he
-could lay about him with perilous rapidity, whilst
-his fine bowling claimed five for 14 when Oxford
-was dismissed for 42, and his ball removed the bails
-each time. It would be idle to suggest that at
-Cambridge Mr. D. L. A. Jephson showed much of
-the great ability he subsequently developed. Indeed,
-he only once scored 50, and his over-arm bowling
-was far below the standard of his later lobs. But his
-fielding was invariably excellent. Mr. A. J. L. Hill
-was an excellent all-round cricketer. His placing was
-always excellent, and his dash in meeting the ball,
-and when bowling his capacity for suddenly sending in
-a ball which whipped back unexpectedly quick, proved
-that he was of value in all departments. Finally
-comes Mr. F. S. Jackson. Possessing a huge school
-reputation at Harrow, he did not at first effect any
-sensational cricket. A steady fast bowler and sound
-bat, was perhaps all that could be reported until his
-third year, when he became captain, and signalised
-his skipperdom by heading both tables of averages.
-In 1893 he improved materially on his batting figures,
-and was by this time recognised as the great cricketer
-whose finest triumph was his batting at the pinch in
-the test matches of 1902. A phenomenal self-reliance<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_327" id="Page_327">[327]</a></span>
-has always characterised his play, but it is
-certain that since Mr. S. M. J. Woods no such fine
-all-round amateur has come into prolonged participation
-in good matches.</p>
-
-<p>It may be noted, with reference to a contemporary
-cry of the difficulty of freshmen in getting their
-blues, that in 1890 there were five vacancies in
-the Cambridge eleven, and the five freshmen who
-appeared in the first match, <i>v.</i> C. I. Thornton’s
-eleven, all obtained their colours. These were Messrs.
-R. N. Douglas, E. C. Streatfield, D. L. A. Jephson,
-F. S. Jackson, and A. J. L. Hill. In the second
-innings of the game just mentioned, Mr. S.
-M. J. Woods took all ten wickets for under
-7 runs apiece, after capturing five for only 19
-runs in the first. Going to Brighton that year,
-Cambridge scored 703 for nine wickets, the chief
-scores being: Mr. F. G. J. Ford 191, Mr. G.
-MacGregor 131, Mr. C. P. Foley 117, Mr. R. N.
-Douglas 84 and 62, and Mr. F. S. Jackson 60.
-Next year the Light Blues against Sussex totalled
-359 and 366, without an individual century. In all
-probability no University ever had such strenuous
-games with a county as Cambridge about this period
-played with Surrey, then in the zenith of their fame.</p>
-
-<p>Now occurs the opportunity to refer to two
-incidents which created an enormous sensation, and
-eventually led to an alteration in the law of following
-on. The facts can be briefly put. Oxford in
-1893 needed 8 runs to save the follow-on, when the
-last men were at the wicket. The Cambridge<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_328" id="Page_328">[328]</a></span>
-captain, Mr. F. S. Jackson, instructed Mr. C. M.
-Wells to bowl a no-ball to the boundary, and after
-the batsman, Mr. W. H. Brain, had covered a very
-wide ball, to send down one even more off the
-wicket. In 1896 Oxford needed 12 runs to save
-the follow-on, when Mr. R. P. Lewis, a notoriously
-bad bat, came in eleventh. Mr. F. Mitchell then
-told Mr. E. B. Shine to bowl two no-balls, each of
-which went to the boundary for four, and then a
-ball which scored four for byes. The hostile
-demonstration from the pavilion was one of the
-most demoralising ever heard on a cricket ground.
-In sober truth it must be confessed that the captains
-were within their legal rights in ordering unprecedented
-action to obviate the possibility of their
-opponents purposely getting out. Yet all that is
-not forbidden by law cannot be perpetrated without
-censure. Having written so much, we prefer to pass
-on, glad to have briefly finished our allusion to the
-only unpleasantness in the long series of University
-matches.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-439.jpg" width="400" height="162" id="i328"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A MATCH IN 1805.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_329" id="Page_329">[329]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Oxford now demands some attention, for Cambridge
-has latterly held the chief place in these pages.
-Mr. M. R. Jardine was not successful until his fourth
-season, when he amassed a valuable 140, thus
-redeeming long-deferred expectations. Yet at all
-times it was felt that the runs he saved by his
-wonderful fielding were of more value than those
-he made from the bat. Two cricketers who have
-been before the public ever since, and who in
-different ways have proved notable exponents of
-batting, are Messrs. E. Smith and L. C. H. Palairet.
-The latter must to the present generation be the
-pre-eminent example of distinction and graceful
-perfection. Mr. Ernest Smith has always been a
-redoubtable and rapid run-getter, making his scores
-without apparent exertion, yet contriving to entirely
-baffle the opposing captain by the pertinacious skill
-with which he places his rapid hits. As a fast bowler
-he enjoyed days of great success, and was always
-efficient in the field. A senior from Winchester,
-only participating in one University match, was Mr.
-V. T. Hill. Left-handed, and possessing much of
-the dash and vigour of Mr. H. T. Hewett, he hit
-114 in 1892 in a fashion which frankly earned the
-epithet sensational. Possibly owing to the exceptional
-interest it always arouses, the encounters of
-the Blues have produced a remarkable number of
-notable innings, but none surpasses that of Mr. Hill
-in vigour and “fireworks.” It was altogether a
-great game, that of 1892. Oxford, having lost Mr.
-Palairet and Mr. R. T. Jones without a run on the
-board, amassed 365. Cambridge, in a minority of
-205, followed on, and put their opponents in for
-186, which were knocked off with five wickets to
-spare.</p>
-
-<p>New men coming into the teams about this time
-were not less excellent than their predecessors.
-Cambridge in 1893, in his third year, tried K. S.
-Ranjitsinhji, who was third in the averages, his chief
-scores being 40, 55, 38, 58, and 40. Mr. J. Douglas,
-a capital bat, with a delightful way of scoring neatly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_330" id="Page_330">[330]</a></span>
-off all bowling alike, used in those days to bowl
-slows which obtained a fair number of wickets. Mr.
-A. O. Jones, carefully coached by Arthur Shrewsbury,
-of course showed barely a glimpse of the great
-powers he subsequently displayed for Notts. Mr.
-L. H. Gay was a wicket-keeper altogether above the
-average, who had singular ill-luck in finding so many
-of his terms at Cambridge tally with those of Mr.
-MacGregor. He was a lively hitter, whose wicket
-was uncommonly hard to obtain. One graceful bat
-remains to be mentioned, Mr. P. H. Latham, who,
-good as he was, ought to have been still better, and
-would have been if he could have resisted the temptation
-to lash out at an insidious slow. Treading on
-the heels of these came another remarkable group of
-bats. The brilliancy of Mr. N. F. Druce has hardly
-been excelled. His batting was once described as
-“the champagne of cricket,” and certainly the epithet
-is deserved. Practically his connection with the
-game ceased after his residence at Trinity Hall,
-except for one tour in Australia; so it is the more
-necessary to emphasise how very fine, as well as
-captivating, was his method of run-getting. It may
-be added that he has the highest average of any
-Cantab, namely, 52.47 for an aggregate of 2414,
-and <i>v.</i> Mr. C. I. Thornton’s eleven amassed 227
-not out, the highest score ever made at Cambridge,
-the opposing bowlers including Mr. F. S.
-Jackson, Hirst, Woodcock, and Hearne. Mr. W. G.
-Druce never attained the same standard as his
-more famous brother, but he was a valuable run-getter<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_331" id="Page_331">[331]</a></span>
-and also a most useful wicket-keeper.
-Mr. F. Mitchell, despite a remarkable start, did
-not in his University cricket display the form
-which culminated in his great batting of 1901.
-Mr. T. N. Perkins was a notably punishing bat, but
-the great Cambridge weakness lay in the miserable
-quality of the attack. Oxford in this respect was
-not much stronger, though Mr. G. F. H. Berkeley
-in his day was above the average. At this period,
-which coincides with that when one of the present
-writers heartily enjoyed his own University career,
-there were some distinguished bats to be added to
-those noticed above. Prominent, of course, was Mr.
-C. B. Fry, in those days a much slower run-getter
-than when he amassed those six consecutive centuries
-for Sussex. Mr. R. C. N. Palairet was often a
-formidable scorer, and when he and his brother went
-in first for Oxford <i>v.</i> Cambridge in 1893, it was for
-the first time since 1878 that two brothers had done
-so for the senior University; it had then been the
-two Webbes. Cambridge furnishes only one such
-incident, the case of Messrs. G. B. and J. E. K.
-Studd in 1882. Mr. G. J. Mordaunt was a capital
-bat and an absolutely beautiful field in the country,
-the amount of ground he covered and his rapidity in
-returning the ball being quite extraordinary. To
-these must be added that attractive bat, Mr. H. K.
-Foster, with his graceful strokes, some of them learnt
-in the racquet-court. At least one prominent judge
-maintains that his forlorn effort of 121 on fourth
-hands in 1895 was the superb gem of the whole series<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_332" id="Page_332">[332]</a></span>
-of big University scores since 1878. His efforts for
-Worcestershire have shown how little of a lucky
-accident was this brilliant achievement. Few sounder
-bats ever appeared than Mr. P. F. Warner, and if
-more prolonged praise be not added, it is only
-because the warm friendship and admiration of the
-two writers regard it as superfluous. His scores
-have been made in many climes, but the best of them
-all have been compiled at headquarters.</p>
-
-<p>In 1901, one of the present scribes contributed to
-an article written for the <i>Badminton Magazine</i> by
-the other the following account of the close finish
-of the University match of 1896, and it is felt that
-no more sincere record could now be penned; hence
-its partial quotation is perhaps pardonable:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p>“The last choice, not made until the morning of
-the match, lay between G. B. Raikes and G. O.
-Smith. Now as the attack was rather tender (P. S.
-Waddy was the only real ‘change’ to F. H. E.
-Cunliffe and J. C. Hartley), it was universally thought
-that the former as a bowler should have the preference
-(he had played in the two previous years);
-but he was bowling none too well at the time, and
-eventually the decision was in favour of strengthening
-the batting. As events proved, this selection settled
-the match. Cambridge batted first, Burnup and
-Wilson making a long stand; Bray hit confidently
-at the finish. I think, however, it speaks well for
-Oxonian fielding, that on a fast true wicket, against
-only four bowlers (C. C. Pilkington also went on),
-it took six hours to amass 319, Mordaunt’s work in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_333" id="Page_333">[333]</a></span>
-the country being especially fine. We did none too
-well in the first innings, and owing to the no-ball
-incident we saved following on. This incident, to
-my mind, was an error of judgment. The Cambridge
-eleven had not had a long outing, the discrepancy of
-120 is a lot in a ‘Varsity match, and to follow on
-between five and seven is not to enjoy the best of
-the day’s light at Lord’s. At the same time, the reception
-Cambridge had at the hands of the members
-of M.C.C. was unpardonable, and certainly prejudiced
-their play in the second attempt. Whilst saying so,
-I am not detracting from Cunliffe’s performance, who,
-for the first hour, bowled better than he ever had
-before. Norman Druce, the best bat on either side,
-stemmed disaster. So with two wickets in hand Cambridge
-on the second evening led by 217, and directly
-play ceased rain fell heavily. However, that rain
-proved our godsend, for a light roller on it, binding
-the wicket together, made it better than at any
-previous time in the match, which was saying a good
-deal. Eventually Oxford was left with 330 to win,
-and up to that time the highest total ever recorded
-on fourth hands in the University contest was 176.
-A bad start was made, for at luncheon three good
-wickets were down for 81, Mordaunt, Foster, and
-Warner being disposed of, the latter having the unique
-experience of being twice run out in a University
-match. With Pilkington and G. O. Smith together,
-it dawned on the Oxonian supporters that, after all,
-victory was not out of the question. From this
-time, helped by a few errors in the field, we never<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_334" id="Page_334">[334]</a></span>
-looked back. I had an enjoyable partnership with
-the hero of the game, and before I was caught at the
-wicket, a possible victory was in sight, for the sting
-had gone out, to a great extent, of the Cambridge
-attack (G. L. Jessop, C. E. M. Wilson, E. B. Shine,
-and P. W. Cobbold). Bardswell followed me, full
-of confidence, and hit with bland imperturbability,
-scoring the winning stroke, being missed off it, by
-the way, by Burnup. Of G. O. Smith’s innings of
-132 it is impossible to speak too highly, and he
-thoroughly deserved his memorable ovation, the
-whole pavilion rising and cheering him. All said
-and done, looking back, apart from unbounded
-admiration for his prowess, the great factor of
-Oxford’s success was undoubtedly the fielding. We
-had precious little bowling, and conventional fielding
-would have given us no chance. The game was
-won by the work of the eleven in combination, and
-if only the fielding in first-class matches were what
-it should be, drawn games would be very rare.
-Reform the fielding, and then the laws of the game
-will need but little reformation.”</p>
-
-<p>By this time it will have been noticed that the
-Light Blues had been reinforced by that prince of
-hard hitters, Mr. G. L. Jessop, who was a tearaway
-bowler to boot, and that admirable batsman, Mr.
-C. J. Burnup, the new Kent captain. The succession
-of clever Cambridge wicket-keepers was kept up by
-Mr. E. H. Bray, than whom no one ever kept his
-hands closer to the sticks. After this, for the next
-few years University cricket undoubtedly fell a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_335" id="Page_335">[335]</a></span>
-little flat. It was overshadowed to an unfortunate
-extent by the more absorbing interest evinced in
-county cricket. There were excellent cricketers on
-each side, but the teams were not so cohesive as that of
-1896, had not the same proportion of really prominent
-amateurs as heretofore, and&mdash;here is the chief point&mdash;the
-idea had become prevalent that the keenness of
-the game was relaxed in the trial matches. So
-thoroughly was this re-established in 1902, so keen
-was the big match that year, and so bright the
-prospects of the game in the immediate future at
-both Universities, that it is permissible to frankly
-state so much, and to regard the years between 1896
-and 1902 as ebb years, in comparison to the onward
-flow from 1889 to 1896.</p>
-
-<p>But there was one gorgeous piece of cricket
-performed by the greatest of recent undergraduates.
-Mr. R. E. Foster, the one batsman since Mr. Norman
-Druce equally perfect to watch, played in 1900 a
-score of 171, a new record in the match, the previous
-best contribution having been Mr. Key’s 143 in 1886.
-An eye-witness wrote in that cricketer’s Bible, <i>Wisden</i>:
-“The innings was not only a great one in a numerical
-sense, but was in every way a magnificent display of
-batting. He only took three hours and ten minutes
-to get his runs, and, so far as anyone noticed, he did
-not give a single chance. Apart from the fact that
-he once failed to bring off a more than usually daring
-pull, and that just before he was out he made a
-dangerous stroke beyond mid-off, we did not see any
-fault in his play. As a matter of record, it may be<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_336" id="Page_336">[336]</a></span>
-added that he hit twenty-four fours, three threes, and
-thirteen twos. Hitting more superb than his can
-scarcely have been seen since Yardley played his
-great innings of 130 in 1872. He was equally strong
-all round the wicket, driving magnificently on the off
-side, pulling with the utmost certainty, and making any
-number of late cuts that were as safe as they were
-effective.” It will be remembered that ten days
-later he followed this up by scoring two separate
-hundreds for Gentlemen <i>v.</i> Players at Lord’s,
-a feat never performed in this match by any
-other cricketer appearing for either denomination.
-His average for Oxford was 77 for an aggregate
-of 930, and he led his team through a victorious
-season, as five matches were won, none lost, and
-four drawn.</p>
-
-<p>Of other undergraduates, Mr. B. J. T. Bosanquet
-worked hard, getting a good many wickets and
-scoring with reliable consistency. A superb wicket-keeper
-was produced in Mr. H. Martyn, for with a
-style that was a model of neatness, he was particularly
-strong on the leg side, as well as a forcing bat. Not
-nearly enough credit was given to Mr. C. H. B.
-Marsham for his exceptionally meritorious century
-on fourth hands, and in disadvantageous circumstances,
-in the University match of 1901. It was
-not until a year later that he came to be generally
-recognised as a batsman of judicious temperament,
-possessing a very pretty knack of placing the ball
-hard on the off side. On contemporary Oxford it
-would be unfair to pass judgment, but it is at least<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_337" id="Page_337">[337]</a></span>
-permissible to express the belief that Mr. W. H. B.
-Evans (nephew of the once-renowned bowler) will
-fulfil our high expectation, and that Mr. W. Findlay
-is one of the best custodians of the sticks to be found
-in current cricket.</p>
-
-<p>Turning to Cambridge, the brothers Wilson have
-emulated the feat of the brothers Foster at Oxford,
-and each scored a century in the University match.
-The elder, Mr. C. E. M. Wilson, in his four
-University matches scored 351, with an average of
-nearly 44, and took twelve wickets at a cost of 21
-runs apiece. The younger, Mr. E. R. Wilson, in a
-similar series of fixtures, averaged 42, with an aggregate
-of 296, and captured nineteen wickets for less
-than 22 runs each. These meritorious figures were
-achieved by steady cricket, which never pandered to
-a gallery, never took a risk, nor for one moment
-became really brilliant. For comparison, it may be
-added that Mr. R. E. Foster averaged 48 for a total
-of 342. Of the other Cantabs, Mr. T. L. Taylor, of
-course, has been the soundest and greatest bat. Indeed,
-on a wet wicket he has rarely had a superior. Mr.
-S. H. Day has proved himself to be amongst the
-best of young cricketers, and Mr. E. M. Dowson
-with bat and ball has done yeoman service. As a
-singularity, it may be mentioned that in 1902 Mr.
-E. F. Penn reappeared in the eleven, after being two
-years absent at the war.</p>
-
-<p>To mention the legion who have passed from
-their University eleven into that of the Gentlemen
-would take up too much space, but it may be of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_338" id="Page_338">[338]</a></span>
-interest to give a list of those who have represented
-England in the test matches at home:&mdash;</p>
-
-<table id="tt03" summary="tt03">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdc"><span class="smcap">Oxford</span></td>
- <td class="tdc"><span class="smcap">Cambridge</span></td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Sir T. C. O’Brien.</td>
- <td class="tdl">A. P. Lucas (Uppingham).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Lord Harris (Eton).</td>
- <td class="tdl">A. G. Steel (Marlborough).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">E. F. S. Tylecote (Clifton).</td>
- <td class="tdl">A. Lyttelton (Eton).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">C. B. Fry (Repton).</td>
- <td class="tdl">C. T. Studd (Eton).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">L. C. H. Palairet (Repton).</td>
- <td class="tdl">G. E. MacGregor (Uppingham).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td rowspan="4"> </td>
- <td class="tdl">GF. S. Jackson (Harrow).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">K. S. Ranjitsinhji.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">G. L. Jessop.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">A. O. Jones (Bedford).</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Batting&mdash;25 inn., 404 runs, 16.4 average.</td>
- <td class="tdl">69 inn., 2316 runs, 33.39 average.</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Bowling&mdash;18 runs, 0 wicket.</td>
- <td class="tdl">1265 runs, 36 wickets, 35.5 average.</td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<p class="p1">And further, one of the writers, who is in the
-habit of perpetrating statistics, has made out that
-against Australians in this country, in eleven-a-side
-matches, Oxonians (past and present) have scored
-10,439 runs in 527 completed innings, averaging
-19.426 per innings; and Cantabs (past and present)
-have scored 17,834 runs in 924 completed innings,
-averaging 19.276 per innings. The Oxford bowlers
-have claimed 270 Colonial wickets at a cost of 6202
-runs, thus costing 22.282 runs apiece; but the Cambridge
-bowlers, though they captured 392 wickets,
-did so at an expense of 43.36 runs apiece, the
-aggregate being 16,892.</p>
-
-<p>Passing from figures to matches, it may be as well
-to sketch the programme of each University season.
-Directly term commences, usually in April, when<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_339" id="Page_339">[339]</a></span>
-the weather is miserably cold and wet, and no one
-has had any practice, comes the Seniors’ match. As
-the object of the executive is to find new bowlers, it
-is obvious that the bowlers in this game are none of
-the best, even judged by the low standard of amateur
-attack. There is, as a rule, a large amount of heavy
-scoring, but the fielding is slack, and the fixture is
-invested with little real keenness. Far more enthusiasm
-is aroused by the Freshmen’s match. Here is
-the pick of the public schools of the year before,
-with a stray candidate from a colony or a private
-tutor’s. The cricket is not co-operative, for each
-is trying to make a good impression “on his own.”
-In the heat of modern competition, it is particularly
-difficult for a batsman to obtain his blue as a freshman.
-With bowling it is different, but the captain is
-prone to wait till the promising undergraduate has
-acquired some experience in county cricket. Other
-trial games are XII. <i>v.</i> Next XVI., the XI. <i>v.</i> XVI.
-Freshmen, “Perambulators” <i>v.</i> “Etceteras.” The
-“Perambulators” are composed of those who come
-from Eton, Winchester, Harrow, and Rugby, whilst
-“Etceteras” are selected from those from other schools.
-Then come the University fixtures. The opening is
-against a Gentlemen of England team, of which one
-of the present writers has latterly had charge&mdash;a
-very pleasant game for all concerned, and one provocative
-of no little curiosity to see how the new
-men shape. As a rule a couple of counties, M.C.C.,
-and latterly Dr. Grace’s club, with the Australians, if
-on tour, form the rest of the home fixtures. Thus<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_340" id="Page_340">[340]</a></span>
-far the University captain has probably been varying
-his side a good deal, and has had one or two extra
-places available for trials, because blues may be in
-the schools. But by the time the out matches begin,
-if the eleven be not pretty well together, matters
-cannot be altogether favourable. Good cricket at
-the Oval and heavy scoring at Brighton are the
-preludes to the final trial <i>v.</i> M.C.C. at Lord’s. Half
-the Oxford eleven now never play in this latter engagement,
-and it must be said that there is some reason
-for this, for whereas Cambridge get a clear three
-days’ rest before the ‘Varsity match at the Oval,
-Oxford sometimes only get one day. The final place
-is often a matter of the most dubious difficulty.
-There are often two men whose merits are almost
-equal, and the decision, if wrong, may ultimately ruin
-the big match.</p>
-
-<p>What a game it is, Oxford <i>v.</i> Cambridge, unrivalled
-for its sporting keenness, and if it has
-proved a triumph to many, it has also been a game
-of cruel disappointment in those who have been
-expected to do best. The importance of the match
-to the funds of M.C.C. can be gathered from the
-annual balance-sheet of the club, and considering
-the difficulty of affording sufficient money for professionals
-and other expenses at the Universities, it
-may be open to the consideration of the committee
-if it would not be judicious were the premier club to
-increase the amount of the annual donation to the
-rival centres of education, whose delegates provide
-such an immense share of the club revenue. If the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_341" id="Page_341">[341]</a></span>
-University match were to be removed from Lord’s&mdash;<i>absit
-omen</i>&mdash;it is obvious that the club in St. John’s
-Wood would suffer far more than either Oxford or
-Cambridge. Such an exodus is not probable, but the
-old order changes, and it would be wise as well as
-generous if the committee could give more lavishly
-where it receives so bountifully.</p>
-
-<p>A survey of all the University matches seems to
-authorise two deductions: Firstly, that, all else being
-equal, it is better to choose for places in University
-teams men who have already played before a crowd,
-because nervousness is so apt to overtake the novice
-when participating in this fixture. Secondly, that the
-presence of a formidable fast bowler is the best
-agency for victory. Matches, as a rule, have gone
-to the team which backed up a destructive attack
-with competent fielding, and there seems no reason
-why in this respect history should not repeat itself.
-We may be permitted to conclude with an expression
-of the sincere hope that University cricket may
-maintain its high position, and that the big match
-will remain something in which all the Empire shall
-continue to take legitimate pride and interest, because
-it is the contest between the best of England’s youth
-fought in true sporting fashion.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_342" id="Page_342">[342]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-454.jpg" width="400" height="571"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER XI</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">COUNTRY-HOUSE CRICKET</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">H. D. G. Leveson-Gower</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">I have</span> not the least idea where my genial editor is
-going to put the present chapter in this book, but I
-am willing to wager that it will prove the lightest
-and most frivolous in his team. In the literary menu
-I sincerely hope some one will find it the savoury of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_343" id="Page_343">[343]</a></span>
-the meal, because personally I like savouries best, and
-naturally I prefer my own chapter to any other&mdash;parenthetically,
-I have not seen any of the rest, except
-the one which I had a share in writing. No
-one has perhaps played more country-house cricket
-than I have, and certainly no one has derived more
-enjoyment from the matches. So I can write with
-agreeable memories. But as the games are the least
-formal in the whole range of cricket, therefore I feel
-this chapter needs no apology for being a trifle
-desultory. We are now taking our ease after dinner,
-and chatting in quite a happy-go-lucky way.</p>
-
-<p>“What good times I have had in country-house
-cricket, to be sure,” ought to be the observation of
-any one who has had much to do with such games.
-If not, there has been something wrong with the
-individual. So he is not you, gentle reader, and, if
-that is the test, most certainly he is not me.</p>
-
-<p>All the same, I have not enjoyed the prime of
-country-house cricket. That must be a tradition
-among my seniors. Don’t you know the type of
-jolly old buffer, aged anything between fifty-five and
-seventy, with a big voice, bigger presence, and cheery
-disposition, when the gout does not give him a
-twinge, who lights a cigar, pulls down his shirt-cuffs,
-and has a twinkle in his eye at the very mention of
-country-house cricket?</p>
-
-<p>Men of this type made country-house cricket a
-thing of gorgeous merriment. Possibly at college
-they had paid more attention to May Week than to
-Plato, and to Eights Week than to Smalls. But<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_344" id="Page_344">[344]</a></span>
-they played for their runs in life as keenly as they
-tried to make them at cricket, and if they are not on
-the roll of fame, their names are in letters of gold
-on the list of English gentlemen. And mark you,
-it’s no light thing to be a real English gentleman.
-A goodly number of those who call themselves such
-don’t behave as such, perhaps have no conception of
-the true decencies of that most honourable walk in
-life. But that’s another story, and my theme is
-cricket.</p>
-
-<p>Moreover, I am not an old buffer, and I am going
-to have my say in this chapter. So having patted
-the elder generation admiringly on the back, I shall
-confine myself to my own.</p>
-
-<p>Therefore I am compelled to repeat that, as far as
-I can judge, the palmy days of country-house cricket
-were before my time. I have had a rattling good
-experience myself, but each year I see some perceptible
-shortening in of the amount of this class of cricket.
-Not that there is not enough for anybody, in all
-conscience, so long as he is in the swim. But it is
-more difficult to get just the right men to play, and
-just the right places to play at. No one who ever
-met me would bring up any charge of pessimism.
-I am merely stating a fact for the benefit, say, of
-school-boys of to-day, who may not be able to get
-quite such a golden time in just the same way as I
-and scores of my contemporaries.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-457.jpg" width="400" height="531" id="i344"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc30" summary="c30">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Picture by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>John Collet.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>MISS WICKET AND MISS TRIGGER.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">“Miss Trigger you see is an excellent shot.<br />
-And Forty-five Notches Miss Wicket’s just got.”</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_345" id="Page_345">[345]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The multiplication of clubs has not only spoilt
-to some extent the fixtures of the elder clubs, but
-also prevents the younger ones from getting exactly
-the matches they want. The next detrimental is the
-multiplicity of first-class fixtures. In 1881 there
-were about eighty such matches. Last year 154
-matches were played in the county competition, and
-there were quite seventy others which had claims
-upon the compilers of statistics. The ratio of time
-available for a genuine amateur good enough to play
-in matches of this standard to snatch for the relaxation
-of an off-day country match therefore differs
-perceptibly. Moreover, there is an even worse
-obstacle, and it is that, nowadays, gentlemen take up
-professions much earlier. Men who are going to
-practice at the Bar can no longer afford to be idle
-during several summers after they have come down
-from the University. If they are going into business,
-into the City or on the Stock Exchange, it is, to-day,
-at the earliest possible date, not at the latest. Truly
-the old order changes, for formerly where a young
-man might laugh and disport himself in the days of
-his youth, now he must work to earn a living wage
-in the struggle for life. Fourthly, there is the
-insidious beguiling of golf, which attracts many a
-man from Saturday cricket. All these changes are
-marked on the sheet which records the difficulties of
-country-house cricket.</p>
-
-<p>Going one step further, look at the Herculean
-task of collecting a team. You must offer good
-enough matches to get the aid of really good
-cricketers; and even then the bulk are off on tours.
-A mere village match, be it ever so cheery and
-enjoyable, will not induce a man to travel a long<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_346" id="Page_346">[346]</a></span>
-distance, to come to a strange place, where he knows
-no one but his skipper. It is not human nature
-in the twentieth century, and nowhere does human
-nature come out more plainly than at cricket.
-Show me the spirit in which a man plays a cricket
-week, and I will tell you his character; it is often
-easier to gauge than his true form, which may be
-affected by ill-health or adverse weather, or even
-genuine bad luck. A great deal too much is heard
-about luck in cricket. I do not say it does not
-exist. For example, I would say Haigh had shocking
-luck in not being chosen in a test match in
-1902, and that Mr. J. H. Brain had a real spell of
-bad luck when he scored 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 2 in Oxford
-<i>v.</i> Cambridge and the two Gentlemen <i>v.</i> Players
-matches of 1885, when at the very top of his form.
-But for the most part “luck” is made the excuse for
-other things at cricket.</p>
-
-<p>Let me sketch an ideal week of country-house
-cricket, such as I have myself experienced several
-times. People are asked to stay in the house who
-are all previously acquainted with one another, thereby
-removing any stiffness and undue formality. There
-have been cases where, from almost undue kindness,
-host and hostess have had a house full of cricketers,
-many of whom they do not personally know, and the
-guests themselves, however much they enjoy themselves,
-must be conscious of the feeling that they are
-practically staying in a hotel, so little do they really
-come in touch with their hospitable entertainers. I
-do like a hostess to act as mother to the team, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_347" id="Page_347">[347]</a></span>
-for the old sportsman who entertains us to stand
-umpire. A bevy of nice girls are needed to keep us
-all civilised, and the merriment is then tremendous.
-Perhaps if a match is over early there is a ladies’
-cricket match. Anyhow, there is a dance one night.
-On the others, songs, games, practical jokes, any
-amount of happy, innocent nonsense, as well as perchance
-a flirtation as hot as it is hopeless. Boy and
-girl alike know they may never meet again, but they
-won’t waste time meanwhile. Another of the charms
-of country-house weeks, if you are invited to the same
-one regularly, is that year by year you meet a group
-of very nice people you never perhaps see at any
-other time, but who inspire you with sincere regard.
-“Don’t you remember?” and “How’s so-and-so?”
-enable you in five minutes to pick up the old threads.</p>
-
-<p>These form the background. The cricket itself
-ought to be of sufficient importance to interest
-everybody, but not be allowed to degenerate into an
-infatuation, and therefore a nuisance to the fair sex.
-The ground ought not to be too good, for a perfect
-pitch takes the heart out of the bowling, and long
-scoring can be over-indulged in. All the four totals
-over 100 and under 200 was A. G. Steel’s ideal game,
-and it is about the best. The games should have local
-interest, and should if possible bring over one or two
-cricketers known to the house party. As for the
-cricket lunches, most delightful of all Benedick meals,
-on no account let hospitality spoil them. Champagne
-lunches are being horribly overdone. Men do not
-play good cricket on Perrier Jouet, followed by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_348" id="Page_348">[348]</a></span>
-<i>creme de menthe</i>, with two big cigars topping a rich
-and succulent menu. No, give us some big pies, cold
-chickens, a fine sirloin of English beef, and a round
-of brawn, washed down by good ale and luscious
-shandygaff. That is all that cricketers want, and
-kings only fare worse. If the county folk drive over
-in the afternoon the host is afforded an opportunity of
-providing an enjoyable diversion for his neighbours.
-It is quite true that lots of men, unless they
-know that they will be extremely well done, infinitely
-prefer to be put up at a hotel in the
-nearest town. But that is partially because of their
-bachelor shyness, and partially because they fear they
-will be too hampered both in the matter of taking
-their ease and also about tobacco. Formerly it was
-the exception to smoke, now the exception is not to.
-I remember when Smokers <i>v.</i> Non-Smokers was
-played at Lord’s. The former eleven all took the
-field with cigarettes in their mouths, and freely
-declared that some of their opponents had not been
-lifelong total abstainers in the matter of tobacco. It
-was a rattling good game, all the same. Those big
-amateur matches at Lord’s had something of the
-charm of country-house cricket on a large scale,
-thanks to a slight relaxation of formality and a good
-deal of cheery hitting. The best of these functions
-was the I Zingari jubilee match, when the famous
-wanderers opposed the Gentlemen of England in
-1895.</p>
-
-<p>In connection with the immortal gipsy club, it is
-interesting to quote its motto, “Keep your promise&mdash;keep<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_349" id="Page_349">[349]</a></span>
-your temper&mdash;keep your wicket up.”
-Founded in 1835 under the title of the Beverley
-Club, it was renamed by Sir Spencer Ponsonby Fane,
-who with the late Mr. Lorraine Baldwin and my
-own uncle, Mr. Chandos Leigh, will be for ever
-associated with its welfare. The rules are unique,
-and a trifle whimsical; for example: “Entrance be
-nothing, and the annual subscription do not exceed
-the entrance.” At the election of a new member, it
-was enjoined that the candidate should take his stand
-at the wicket with or without a bat, as the committee
-may decide. Being a vagrant body, the I Zingari have
-never boasted a ground of their own, and it is a pity
-that more serious cricket should have lessened the
-importance of their chief matches.</p>
-
-<p>Now, having announced that I am going to be
-desultory, I propose to reel off a batch of anecdotes.
-The bulk will be anonymous, which is a pity, because
-individuality always gives point to a tale, but I have
-no wish to hurt any one’s feelings.</p>
-
-<p>Some years ago, at the period known as “when
-we were boys together,” the late Lord Leconfield
-one summer holidays had a boys’ cricket week at
-Petworth, having teams of Sussex, Surrey, and
-Hampshire youngsters to play. He daily entertained
-all the teams at dinner, which, by the way, was served
-on silver plates. Suddenly, in one of those silences
-which sometimes fall on assembled eaters, a big lad
-shouted, loud enough to be heard even by the late
-Lord Leconfield himself, “I do hate eating off
-these beastly tin plates; in a decent house like this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_350" id="Page_350">[350]</a></span>
-they might give us china ones.” This lad never
-proved good enough for first-class cricket, so
-please do not father the tale on to any prominent
-run-getter.</p>
-
-<p>A certain amateur of a team staying in a country
-house, who was a bit of a wag, by the way, much
-annoyed the rather pompous host by addressing the
-family butler as “waiter.” The skipper of the team
-remonstrated, but with no result. At breakfast the
-cricketer in question never seemed able to get the
-right dish; if he meant eggs, he received kidneys,
-and so forth. This was because, the menu being in
-French, he used to point at random to some item,
-not wishing to betray his ignorance of the language.
-On the last morning of the week, when the usual
-bill of fare was brought to him, he retorted in
-stentorian accents, “Rats to you, waiter; I’ll fetch it
-for myself.”</p>
-
-<p>I have had so many happy years of comradeship
-with “Plum” Warner that he must forgive me if I
-spin a yarn or two about him. I was in the habit of
-taking an eleven each year against Mr. Charles
-Goschen’s team, an ideal country-house cricket match.
-To my dismay, for I was always anxious to win, we
-were once decidedly weak in bowling, and we knew
-Warner was playing for Mr. Charles Goschen’s eleven.
-So after grave consultation we decided that, as we
-were never likely to bowl him out by fair means,
-we would do it by foul. We pressed on him to
-accept an invitation to stay overnight before the
-match. Now, my old friend is most abstemious, but<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_351" id="Page_351">[351]</a></span>
-on this occasion the far-famed claret of our host,
-dexterously administered by the opposing team, had
-considerable effect. He was earnestly solicited to
-give his opinion on every vintage we could find, and
-the spoon might have stood up in the whiskey
-dashed with soda which was mixed for his nightcap.
-On the morrow, when he was out before he ran into
-double figures, we decided that Bacchus was the best
-bowler on our side.</p>
-
-<p>The next story is not a country-house cricket
-story at all, but as it is new in print, it may be
-allowed to slip in. It happened when I was captain
-of Oxford, and I think the match was against the
-Australians. Those who merely study cricket scores
-may not be aware that Warner has a high opinion
-of his own persuasiveness as a change bowler. His
-actual figures for life up to 1902, in first-class cricket,
-drawn from Mr. Home Gordon’s <i>Cricket Form at a
-Glance</i>, are only three wickets for 196 runs, which
-only shows how bad is the judgment of modern
-captains. If he had been permitted the persistency
-of K. S. Ranjitsinhji, he would probably have captured
-more wickets. Last season, when he was captain,
-he failed to disturb the bails to the tune of 51 runs,
-which proves his modesty. I have known captains
-go on to bowl first and stay on through the whole
-innings, but of such certainly is not my old friend.
-However, in the match in question, when our
-opponents wanted about six runs to win, and I don’t
-know how many wickets to fall, I chucked the ball
-to “Plum.” “Ridley and Cobden won’t be in it,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_352" id="Page_352">[352]</a></span>”
-observed one of the fieldsmen, and in memorial was
-written this rhyme:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p class="pp6 p1">Little Plum Warner stood in a corner,<br />
-Thinking he’d like to bowl.</p>
-<p class="pp8">The captain said, “Hum,<br />
-I <i>will</i> put on Plum,</p>
-<p class="pp6">He may get me out of this hole.”</p>
-
-<p class="pn1">But sad to relate, he did not.</p>
-
-<p>Captain Trevor, the popular “Dux,” used to tell
-a cheery story about the demoralising effect of first-class
-cricket. Mr. A. S. Archer had been a big
-scorer for the Incogs; then he went with Lord
-Hawke’s team to the Cape, and on his return had
-changed his style, and could score no more. Captain
-Trevor plucked up courage enough to suggest he
-should forget that he had ever “figured in averages,”
-and should play in the old way.</p>
-
-<p>“You want the golf shot?”</p>
-
-<p>“If you please.”</p>
-
-<p>“And the tennis scoop towards third man?”</p>
-
-<p>“Certainly.”</p>
-
-<p>“And a pull?”</p>
-
-<p>“Three in each over.”</p>
-
-<p>“Right.”</p>
-
-<p>He went to the wicket and made ninety without
-a chance that was accepted.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-467.jpg" width="400" height="281" id="i352"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A COUNTRY HOUSE CRICKET MATCH.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_353" id="Page_353">[353]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Any one who has much to do with getting up
-matches can tell eloquent tales about being chucked.
-Perhaps nobody quite appreciates the force of the
-parable in which they all with one accord began to
-make excuse, until he is running a cricket week.
-This telegram was positively sent by the man on
-whom everything depended, “Can’t come; am
-summoned on a jury.” The wretched captain retorted,
-“Rot, you are not a householder,” but he
-had to fill the vacancy. Not long ago Mr. A. D.
-Whatman, wrote begging forgiveness, but the
-fact was, he was off fishing. As for the accident
-which keeps a man who is passing through town
-“laid up and unable to come on,” it is nearly as
-ancient and as annoying to the manager as that
-hoary chestnut, “prevented by an illness in my
-family.” However, these things will occur in the
-best-arranged teams.</p>
-
-<p>There is a comfort and ease about country-house
-and minor cricket, which you do not get in the
-charmed circle of first-class matches. The good-humoured
-chaff is most healthy, and certainly tends
-to prevent mannerisms, into which many engaged in
-prominent cricket find they are apt to drop. Also
-the search-light of publicity is conspicuous by its
-absence.</p>
-
-<p>Next, I would like to quote a story which my
-old friend Mr. C. W. Alcock relates, and which, I
-fancy, he personally overheard on a tram: “No,
-Bill didn’t get much out of his day’s cricket. He
-had to pay eight bob for his railway fare, and lost ‘is
-day’s screw, and was fined a shilling for being late
-next morning, and ‘e didn’t get no wickets, and ‘e
-missed four ketches, and ‘e got a couple of beautiful
-blobs. He did feel sold, he did.” If anybody
-observes that is what can be euphemistically described<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_354" id="Page_354">[354]</a></span>
-as a chestnut, my retort is, that it will be new
-to a great many people. Certainly we all thought
-the story of Mr. “Buns” Thornton making a mighty
-slog, and Mr. Bonnor subsequently observing that
-he had a sister who could hit as hard, was a hoary
-veteran. You will remember Mr. Thornton’s reply:
-“Why not bring her over and marry her to Louis
-Hall? You could then combine the two styles.”
-That was said at Scarborough, but this very story in
-the cricket week of 1901 in that very town was
-hailed as a diverting and fresh anecdote. Wherefore I
-take courage to proceed in my own garrulous fashion.</p>
-
-<p>Among the pleasantest of all country matches are
-the military weeks. The play is brisk, hard hitting,
-keen fielding, usually a Tommy who sends down expresses
-which it is a treat to cut to the boundary, and,
-of course, the most unbounded hospitality and good-fellowship.
-Then there is always the regimental
-band in the afternoon, and one can do a little dance
-step to beguile the tedium of fielding, or should you
-be dismissed for one of those conspicuous oval blobs,
-it is at least consoling to retire to a tune from the last
-musical comedy. And of course, at soldier fixtures,
-all the ladies of the garrison muster in their brightest
-frocks, and I can truthfully say that a match where
-none of the fair sex are spectators loses one ray of
-sunshine for me. The follies of girls who do not
-understand the game may sound funny set down in
-printer’s ink, but spoken by merry lips, they only
-provoke laughter, while, as a matter of fact, lots of
-ladies understand cricket quite as well as most of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_355" id="Page_355">[355]</a></span>
-men do; moreover, they are singularly quick at
-noticing idiosyncrasies in the players.</p>
-
-<p>School tours are splendid things at the beginning
-of the holidays. Eton Ramblers, Harrow Wanderers,
-Marlborough Blues, Old Malvernians, Uppingham
-Rovers, Old Cliftonians, and last, but chief in my
-eyes, Old Wykehamists&mdash;the very names cause a glow
-at our hearts. There you get boys leaving school
-playing side by side with a schoolmaster or two as
-comrades, and no longer <i>in statu pupillari</i>. The
-former gain confidence, the latter rub off the corners
-which may have become rather sharp during the half,
-and both are leavened by a further batch of old boys
-who have names still respected at the school. The
-cricket is keen, and the talk over the pipes after
-dinner is clean, healthy, and tends to put them all on
-good terms with one another.</p>
-
-<p>I purposed to have written quite a valuable
-treatise on clubs, but when I dipped into the books,
-I either found that the serious matters would be dry-as-dust
-at this stage of my article, or else that it was
-difficult to collect information. So I shall merely
-emphasise the cordiality of the sides which do battle
-each summer. I Zingari come first to my thoughts,
-for not only have I the honour to wear the red,
-yellow, and black, but my uncle, Mr. Chandos Leigh,
-is one of the presiding potentates&mdash;more power to
-him. No longer do these wanderers figure on the card
-of the Canterbury Week, but it is still their festival.
-Theirs is the big tent, theirs the admirable theatrical
-performances, and theirs the true traditions of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_356" id="Page_356">[356]</a></span>
-historic Week. It is the most delightful function in
-county cricket to-day, just as it was formerly the
-greatest boon in old-time cricket. I feel that some
-of the graceful irresponsible matches which were
-contested at Prince’s in the ‘seventies still cast a
-pleasant reflection on the Week at the old minster
-town. Also, I heartily wish I Zingari could revive
-that one-time match <i>v.</i> Gentlemen of England at
-Scarborough, but the difficulty of collecting competent
-sides seems insurmountable. But let no one
-think I Zingari do not keep up their pristine value.
-Have they ever had a finer record than in 1902? It
-reads: matches played, 29; matches lost, 1, Silwood
-Park winning a one-day game by 46 runs.
-So I think the spirit of I Zingari can look very
-beaming when she is pleasantly embodied for the
-epilogue of the Kent festival.</p>
-
-<p>It is impossible to run over the list of clubs.
-Free Foresters, of course, recurs to memory&mdash;cheery,
-bright, with a military leaven, under the admirable
-guardianship of Mr. E. Rutter. Their annual
-volume yields an admirable statement of bustling,
-hard-fought cricket on many welcome swards where
-reporters do not scribble nor the public give heed.
-Amateur cricket owes a great debt to them, and also
-to the Incogniti, in which the present governor of
-Jamaica has taken such keen interest. With varying
-sides, but unvarying good-fellowship, these pilgrims of
-cricket show how many withstand the attractions of
-golf, and prefer to drive the leather rather than the
-Haskell.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_357" id="Page_357">[357]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Each University has one club noteworthy to the
-community at large. Cambridge boasts the Quidnuncs,
-the cap of which is so familiar in county
-matches, because hardly any old blue seems to wear
-his ‘Varsity colours. Against Yorkshire at Lord’s in
-August 1902, four of the Middlesex side wore those
-colours of dark blue with the narrow blue stripe,
-these being Messrs. Cyril Foley, C. M. Wells, R. N.
-and J. Douglas. Though it is limited to fifteen
-members in residence at Cambridge, practically
-everybody who is tried for the eleven appears to outsiders
-to be entitled to wear the caps, though no
-undergraduate in his first year is eligible.</p>
-
-<p>Of the Harlequins I must write more briefly than
-I should like. They are very dear to me, and I had
-the honour in 1902 of being elected Vice-President in
-succession to Mr. A. J. Webbe, who became President
-in consequence of the death of Mr. C. J. B.
-Marsham, who had occupied the position since the
-foundation of the club in 1845. One annual meeting
-is held each year on the first day of the match with
-the Gentlemen of England, when the elections take
-place. Only seventeen members may be in residence,
-and no one can be put up as a candidate until his
-fourth term. There is always one pleasant function,
-the dinner given by that keenest supporter, Mr. T. B.
-Case. If the Harlequins do not play so many matches
-as of yore, it must not be ascribed to lack of enthusiasm,
-but to the more lengthy programme of the
-Authentics, who possess a wider range of selection.
-The Harlequin cap, in its bold contrast, has been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_358" id="Page_358">[358]</a></span>
-seen on every ground, and at Lord’s, to the end of
-their keen careers in the field, it was invariably
-worn by two very fine Oxonian cricketers who never
-obtained their colours, Messrs. T. S. Pearson and J.
-Robertson-Walker. Of yore, half the Oxford eleven
-used to be seen arrayed in the coloured shirt of the
-Harlequins, which was gaudy when new and looked
-shabby when it had been for a short period the sport
-of the elements. I am not speaking by book, but
-my impression is that Mr. “Punch” Phillipson and
-Mr. J. H. Brain would be the two last who have
-donned the garment in first-class cricket. Long life
-and unabating good fellowship to Harlequins, present
-and future! There is every sign that the wish is
-destined to be fulfilled.</p>
-
-<p>The Authentics Cricket Club was founded by
-Everard Britten-Holmes, in November 1883, who,
-from its birth in Brazenose College, Oxford,
-has acted as its Hon. Secretary to the present
-day (1903), G. R. Askwith of B.N.C. being
-its first Hon. Treasurer, then followed by H.
-Acland-Hood of Balliol (1884-89). During the
-summer of 1884, arrangements were made to tour
-during the summer vacation, and what was at first
-but a week’s cricket, has become one of several
-months, and a membership then of 19 has become
-one of nearly 800.</p>
-
-<p>During the winter of 1885, it was decided to
-place the club upon a more solid and active basis,
-and a large gathering of prominent ‘Varsity players
-and others was held at Oxford, a question at that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_359" id="Page_359">[359]</a></span>
-time coming up, as a suggestion, to include Cambridge
-‘Varsity players and others, when it was
-unanimously resolved and carried, that the club be
-called “The Oxford University Authentics,” and
-confined to members of Oxford University only.
-Special rules were drawn up for membership, etc., and
-many matters of detail arranged. More important
-matches were played during the summer vacation,
-with a view of unearthing latent cricket talent, and
-giving members an opportunity of being brought
-more prominently before the cricket authorities at
-Oxford, and their respective counties&mdash;an opportunity
-they could not otherwise then have had. Above all,
-it had in view the keeping of old ‘Varsity cricketers
-of the past in touch with the present, and the present
-in touch with the future. Professor Case of Corpus
-Christi College&mdash;the well-known old Oxford cricket
-blue of 1864, 1865, and 1867&mdash;readily consented
-to become the President, and took much interest in
-the club, and to him we owe its motto: “By Jove’s
-authentic fire.” It may be mentioned that the name
-“Authentics” was given to the club by the founder,
-who, being a musical enthusiast, coined the word
-“Authentics,” as from an authentic cadence in music,
-and as derived from the Greek [Greek: authenteô], “to rule”;
-and from Professor Case’s happy thought the colours
-of the club were suggested&mdash;“Blue” for the sky,
-“Blood Red” for Jove’s arm, and “Old Gold” for
-the lightning.</p>
-
-<p>Reverting to country-house cricket&mdash;aye, and the
-observation does for all club matches&mdash;the great aim<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_360" id="Page_360">[360]</a></span>
-is to induce those participating in first-class cricket
-to don flannels in the minor game. There is one
-great inducement, and let all managers take note of
-it. Tempt the crack amateur by offering him plenty
-of opportunity to bowl. In county cricket the
-amateur, with not a dozen exceptions in 1902&mdash;all I
-recall are Messrs. F. S. Jackson, D. L. A. Jephson,
-E. M. Dowson, E. E. Steel, J. R. Mason, W. M.
-Bradley, G. H. Simpson Hayward, W. W. Odell,
-C. M. Wells, H. Hesketh Pritchard and B. J. T.
-Bosanquet&mdash;field out while the professionals conduct
-the attack. To most amateurs bowling is a joy all
-the sweeter for its rarity. The amateur will not
-resist the bait, and will come if he possibly can.
-There is no cricketer so easy to get on with, or who
-makes a house match go better, than a distinguished
-amateur. The bulk are absolutely without “side,”
-and having learnt the sterner discipline of first-class
-cricket, absolutely revel in their sporting holiday,
-while the effect of their presence on the rest of the
-side is electrical.</p>
-
-<p>With that I conclude. I could write more, if I
-ventured to trespass further on your attention.
-Should I have had the good fortune to divert and
-not to bore, I shall consider myself the luckiest in
-this band of writers, and after all, I have had the
-best of all topics. So, hurrah! and long life to
-country-house cricket!</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-478.jpg" width="400" height="252" id="i361"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcapn"><i>From a Painting by Louis Belanger, belonging to H.M. the King.</i></p>
- <p class="pcap"><i>A VILLAGE MATCH IN 1768.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_361" id="Page_361">[361]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-479.jpg" width="400" height="293"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER XII</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">VILLAGE CRICKET</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">C. F. Wood</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">Constant</span> readers of the <i>Pall Mall Gazette</i> will
-not have missed a most amusing article on “Yokels
-at Cricket,” which appeared over the initials
-“R. E. M.” during the summer of this year of grace
-1902. With a felicity of exaggeration which would
-do credit to Mark Twain, the writer describes his
-experiences on a pitch where the blocks were too
-large to begin with, and too numerous; where all
-that could be said of the fielding was that the men
-in the lost-ball region did their ferreting well; and
-where the fast ball shot, rose five feet, and shot again.
-Sometimes, he pathetically adds, the five-feet rise
-came last.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_362" id="Page_362">[362]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Something of this kind possibly still exists in the
-remoter parts of our sportive country, but as it is
-my intention in the present paper to set down
-nothing about village cricket that has not come
-within the scope of my own experience, I must
-forego at the outset the attractions of these humorous
-irrelevancies, and speak the truth as far as I know it,
-even at the risk of making my contribution to this
-historic work unnecessarily serious.</p>
-
-<p>For the same reason I must deny myself the
-pleasure of dishing up once more the innumerable
-funny stories about village cricket that appear
-periodically in books of this kind; and I have
-further registered a solemn vow to leave the top-hat
-period severely alone, and make no reference to
-Fuller Pilch, Caffyn, Mynn, or any other belted
-heroes of prehistoric days. So what it comes to is
-this: I am going to put down here my own experiences
-and opinions of village cricket as it is played
-to-day by my own village eleven, of which I have
-the honour to be captain, and if the result turns out
-unsatisfactory and of little interest, kindly believe
-that the fault lies in my incapacity of expression, not
-in any lack of excitement in the cricket. <i>That</i> at
-least is beyond reproach.</p>
-
-<p>Please don’t think from the above that, unlike the
-heroines of most of our modern stuffy plays, our club
-has no past! On the contrary, I have before me
-now the accounts of our village club right back to
-29th July 1865, when we expended the sum of
-£1: 7s. in the following irreproachable manner:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_363" id="Page_363">[363]</a></span></p>
-
-<table id="tt04" summary="tt04">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Umpire</td>
- <td class="tdrx">£0</td>
- <td class="tdrx">10</td>
- <td class="tdrx">6</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Dinner for ditto and scorer</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- <td class="tdr">8</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Six <i>Bell’s Life</i> papers</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- <td class="tdr">1</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Stamps</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- <td class="tdr">1</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl">Ball</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- <td class="tdr">6</td>
- <td class="tdr">6</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td rowspan="2"> </td>
- <td class="tdr" colspan="3">&mdash;&mdash;&mdash;&mdash;</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">£1</td>
- <td class="tdr">7</td>
- <td class="tdr">0</td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<p class="p1">Four shillings apiece for the umpire’s and scorer’s
-“dinner” may seem expensive in these modern half-crown
-days, but judging from the next entry, we can
-only consider it an exceptionally moderate occasion.
-On 21st September of the same year, when, if we
-may judge by 1902, the summer was just beginning,
-the same entry reads:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p class="pp6 p1">Dinner for ditto, scorer, and beer £0 11 0</p>
-
-<p class="p1">Whether the extra 3s. represents the amount of
-liquid refreshment required by the umpire and scorer
-alone, or in conjunction with those acting in similar
-capacities on the other side, whose integrity they
-thus thought to drown, does not transpire from the
-account.</p>
-
-<p>All these and many other like interesting matters
-are at the disposal of the gentleman who may still
-do for Kent cricket what Lord Alverstone and
-C. W. Alcock have done for Surrey in their <i>Surrey
-Cricket</i>, just published; but I must not break
-through my self-imposed rule and enlarge any further
-on these exploits of bygone days. Good old Kent!
-Where is the historian that shall do justice to your
-past glories? Or is it that the part is after all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_364" id="Page_364">[364]</a></span>
-greater than the whole, and that when Philip Norman
-finished <i>West Kent Cricket</i>, there was nothing
-left unsaid?</p>
-
-<p>Now of all the various sorts of cricket that are
-played in and out of this country, I am prepared to
-maintain against all the writers in this or any other
-book that village cricket is at once the most amusing
-to watch, the most exciting to play, and of the
-greatest educational value to the English race.
-Notice, I do not call it the most scientific form of
-the game, though there is a special sort of science
-required to finish a match between 3 and 7 <span class="smcap">P.M.</span>
-every Saturday afternoon! Let us first compare
-it, from a spectator’s point of view, with county
-cricket; and it will help to emphasise my point if I
-quote one or two reports of county matches culled at
-random from the daily press in August this year:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p>Notts <i>v.</i> Kent, at Nottingham. “Kent, holding
-a lead of 91 runs on their first innings, did not
-hurry themselves unduly in their second venture.
-Dillon took forty minutes to register a couple of
-singles”!</p>
-
-<p>Leicester <i>v.</i> Sussex, at Brighton. “On Saturday,
-Dr. Macdonald was in three hours and three-quarters
-for 48 runs, having in the previous innings
-made 33 in about two hours. In other words, he
-was batting five hours and forty-five minutes for 81
-runs”! And the poor reporter adds drowsily, “It
-was a terribly monotonous performance.”</p>
-
-<p>Is not this a veritable caricature of cricket? Why,
-rather than watch such a game drag its dreary trail<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_365" id="Page_365">[365]</a></span>
-over three summer days, I would vow never to go
-near a ground again, and take to German skittles.
-Compare this “terribly monotonous performance”
-with the compressed interest of a whole match
-completed in four hours on a village green, with the
-supporters of each eleven shouting each other down,
-as the sun sinks all too rapidly in the western sky,
-and both runs and wickets are freely given away as
-the excitement rises to fever pitch. Which would
-you rather do, candid reader, if you had the choice?
-Stand on your hind legs in the field all one day, sit
-and smoke your tongue sore in the pavilion all the
-next, with a chance of getting a knock on the third,
-or join our village eleven on Saturday afternoon, and
-have four certain hours of unadulterated joy? Well,
-most of us would choose the county eleven, I
-suppose, though we should find it weary work.</p>
-
-<p>But here it strikes me I am poaching on other
-people’s preserves, and before I commit the indiscretion
-of mentioning country-house cricket, which is
-a subject my friend Mr. H. D. G. Leveson-Gower
-is treating in his usual masterly way, let me hasten
-back to my own little corner, from which I was an ass
-to stray.</p>
-
-<p>And yet, having gone so far, I ought perhaps to
-explain why I consider village cricket to be of so
-great an educational value to our race. And by
-education I do not mean the mechanical stuffing of
-an unwilling agent with knowledge for which he can
-never have any possible use, but rather the formation
-of all those characteristics which help to build up<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_366" id="Page_366">[366]</a></span>
-what we call a man&mdash;pluck, temper, self-restraint,
-respect for others, abnegation of self, <i>et hoc genus
-omne</i>. Now the people who play first-class cricket
-are divided into two categories&mdash;those with means
-and leisure who play for love of it and because they
-are good at it, and those who play because they are
-good at it and can make a living out of it; and
-though most of the above virtues can be cultivated to
-a certain extent in a team made up of these two
-classes, yet it is certain that the same spirit does not
-animate an eleven of amateurs and professionals as
-will work wonders in a village team made up of
-every rank in life, the parson, the cobbler, the squire’s
-son, and the blacksmith, all playing on an absolute
-equality, all playing for their side and not for themselves,
-all playing for glory and none for averages
-or talent-money.</p>
-
-<p>And now I really must tell you a little about our
-own village club. In the old days we always used
-to play on the Common, where the turf was excellent
-and the boundaries out of sight; but as
-London got nearer and nearer, and every train
-belched forth a volume of trippers right across the
-ground, we had to shift our quarters, and for £10 a
-year we now have a large but not exclusive interest
-in a ten-acre field. A large square, capable of providing
-about a dozen good wickets during the summer,
-is enclosed with posts and chains, and the patient
-labour of our groundman and umpire (who in his
-leisure hours is also a shoemaker and a lamplighter)
-is year by year producing better results. For<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_367" id="Page_367">[367]</a></span>
-although it is unwise to have a perfect pitch for
-half-day cricket, yet, on the other hand, it must not
-be dangerous, and with the limited means at the
-disposal of a village club, the happy medium is not
-easy to attain. As the seasons roll on, patches are
-repaired with turf “sneaked” from the Common,
-weeds are removed (some of them), manure and fine
-soil is bush-harrowed in, seed is sown, and every
-summer we congratulate ourselves that, if not yet
-quite like the Oval (which we do not want it to be!),
-at all events our ground is the envy of our neighbours.
-I should add that this year (1902) we had a
-whip-up and laid the water on, but only used it
-twice!</p>
-
-<p>Perhaps, in connection with our wicket, I may be
-allowed to recount a little reminiscence, still fresh in
-my memory, of the days when the pitch was not
-what it is now. A short-tempered and fiery member
-of an opposing team was batting, as he always did,
-in spectacles, when a rising ball from our local
-Lockwood hit him right in the face. Seeing what
-I supposed was his eye drop out on the pitch, I
-dashed forward to field and return it, only to discover
-one glass of the spectacles unbroken on the
-turf. Beyond a cut on the bridge of his nose, the
-man had suffered no hurt, but it was long before he
-paid us another visit, or the scorched grass recovered
-from his language.</p>
-
-<p>It is not necessary, but it is useful, to have some
-sort of a pavilion, even for Saturday afternoon
-matches, and we were lucky to get, some five or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_368" id="Page_368">[368]</a></span>
-six years ago, for the cost of removal, an old
-Norwegian house, built of wood, with a corrugated
-iron roof, which suited our purpose admirably. It
-originally consisted of three rooms, two bed-rooms
-and a sitting-room between, and, by putting all the
-windows in the side facing the ground, altering the
-doors, and fitting up the interior with lockers,
-washing-places, store-room for the groundman, bat-racks,
-etc., we have quite sufficient accommodation for
-our purpose. We are also the proud possessors of
-a tea-tent, where every Saturday throughout the
-season, when there is a home match, our kind lady
-friends provide our opponents and ourselves with an
-excellent tea. This smacks perhaps of luxury, and
-wastes a little time, but you must remember that our
-matches are nearly always over before the time for
-drawing stumps arrives, and it is a great attraction
-for those of us who do not always get such a good
-tea for nothing! But more than this, it makes our
-weekly matches a cheery social gathering, it provides
-an enthusiastic gallery of lady friends and admirers,
-and thus adds a charm to the natural beauty of our
-ground which we should be extremely sorry to lose.
-In fact, I attribute much of the prosperity of our
-club to the kind interest of the ladies in the village,
-who do so much for us, and I should like to see
-their excellent example more generally followed
-elsewhere.</p>
-
-<p>Well, now we have got our ground, our pavilion,
-and our tea-tent, what about our officials and our
-members, and the all-important question of “subscription”?<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_369" id="Page_369">[369]</a></span>
-We have a president, captain, vice-captain,
-secretary, treasurer, and a committee of
-six members, all being elected fresh every season at
-the annual meeting. However, so far as my five
-years’ experience goes, no change has been made
-except to fill up vacancies caused by death or
-removal, and the meeting is a merely formal affair
-where we re-elect each other <i>en bloc!</i> The
-president in our case has always been the <i>persona</i>,
-or parson, of the parish, and where there is a curate,
-he is the best man, in my opinion, for the secretaryship.
-The advantages of this arrangement are
-obvious, for he is probably the only gentleman in
-the place who is there all day; he knows where all
-the villagers live, and it is easier for him than any
-one else to go round and get up the teams. For
-however much you print on your match-cards that
-“members wishing to play in any match should send
-in their names to the captain before Thursday
-evening,” or words to that effect, the fact remains that
-no villager has ever yet been known to <i>offer</i> to play;
-and though a man may be thirsting for a place in a
-certain match, and would be seriously hurt if he
-were not asked, yet the only reply he will make to
-your pressing invitation is a half-hearted, “Well, I
-don’t mind if I do”! <i>But</i>, if the curate is not a
-good player, he should content himself with his
-secretarial duties, and not appear in the field.
-However excellent he may be in other ways, if he
-cannot hold a catch or keep his bat decently straight,
-he ought not to give the enemy occasion to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_370" id="Page_370">[370]</a></span>
-blaspheme. As Dean Hole says in answer to his
-own question, “Is it right for a clergyman to
-hunt?” “On one immutable condition&mdash;<i>that you
-ride straight to hounds</i>.” We limit our committee to
-six members, chosen from every walk in life&mdash;a
-merchant, a farmer, a solicitor, a gardener, and so on&mdash;and
-in the diversity of opinions there is sometimes
-much wisdom. As a matter of fact, I have
-never found gardeners, as a class, of very much use
-in connection with cricket. They may know a little
-about turf, but, barring a few exceptions, they do
-not make good players. The reasons are not far to
-seek. From the very nature of their work, they
-have fewer opportunities than others of taking part
-either in practice or matches: in summer, there is
-always a lot of mowing, watering, and so on to do,
-and when a man has been working with his back,
-arms, and legs all day, he feels little inclined for
-more violent exertion. This too is probably why
-they are slower in their movements and clumsier
-with their hands and feet than most other people.
-But at least they take their waistcoats off, which a
-stableman never does. Now, why is that? It is
-almost a rule without an exception that a man who
-works in the stable in trousers, belt, and shirt, adds a
-waistcoat to his outfit before he goes in to bat.
-Still, waistcoat or no waistcoat, he is generally bright
-and quick, and with practice makes a smart field.
-Perhaps the best village cricketers, taking them all
-round, are recruited from the ranks of carpenters,
-footmen, blacksmiths, and schoolmasters, rather than
-from the stables and the gardens, but in any case it’s
-more than half the battle to get them young. There
-must be disappointments, of course. Some of the
-most promising boys lose their interest in the game
-when they think they are men, and become loafers;
-some go out to work in other places, and the team
-knows them no more; but you are amply repaid if
-two or three of one generation at last find their
-strength, and after a year or more of painstaking
-duck-eggs suddenly blossom out into consistent
-scorers, to the no small astonishment of their friends
-and their own huge delight. Don’t think from this
-that we set too much store by good batting. On
-the contrary, all our matches (and other people’s
-too!) are won or lost by fielding, and I can never
-tell my men too often that it does not do to give
-your opponent two, or even three, lives, when he
-has made up his mind to take yours at the very first
-opportunity. Only, as at golf the good drive gives
-one the greatest pleasure, though the high approach
-may be the prettiest shot, and the deadly put wins
-the hole, so at cricket the greatest pleasure of the
-greatest number is to make lots of runs, though they
-may not be wanted, when a good catch in the deep
-field or a smart return may win the match.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-489.jpg" width="400" height="537" id="i370"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc31" summary="c31">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Sketch by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>Robert Seymour.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap">“<i>OUT, SO DON’T FATIGUE YOURSELF, I BEG, SIR!</i>”</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-490.jpg" width="400" height="604" id="i371"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc32" summary="c32">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Water-Colour by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>J. Hayllar.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>A CRICKETER.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_371" id="Page_371">[371]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>I mentioned just now the ominous word “subscription.”
-The question of finance is one which
-must enter to a large extent into the prosperity of a
-village, or any other, club, and happy those who
-have enough cloth to cut to ensure their coats
-fitting! In our own case we generally seem to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_372" id="Page_372">[372]</a></span>
-have succeeded in making both ends meet, though, as
-will be seen from the following typical years’ figures,
-times were not always prosperous:&mdash;</p>
-
-<table id="tt05" summary="tt05">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1867.</td>
- <td class="tdc">Receipts</td>
- <td class="tdrx">£34</td>
- <td class="tdrx">4</td>
- <td class="tdrx">0</td>
- <td class="tdc">Expenses</td>
- <td class="tdrx">£34</td>
- <td class="tdrx">0</td>
- <td class="tdrx">6</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1877.</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">18</td>
- <td class="tdrx">1</td>
- <td class="tdrx">0</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">17</td>
- <td class="tdrx">0</td>
- <td class="tdrx">2</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1887.</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">14</td>
- <td class="tdrx">1</td>
- <td class="tdrx">11</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">12</td>
- <td class="tdrx">7</td>
- <td class="tdrx">6</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1897.</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">31</td>
- <td class="tdrx">5</td>
- <td class="tdrx">2</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">34</td>
- <td class="tdrx">19</td>
- <td class="tdrx">6</td>
- </tr>
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdr">1902.</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">47</td>
- <td class="tdrx">8</td>
- <td class="tdrx">6</td>
- <td class="tdc">”</td>
- <td class="tdrx">38</td>
- <td class="tdrx">11</td>
- <td class="tdrx">5</td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<p class="p1">I ought to add that these amounts represent only
-annual subscriptions and current expenses, and do
-not include special collections made for special
-purposes, such as enclosing the pitch in posts and
-chains, laying on the water, and so on. If a “round
-robin” is not sufficient to cover these extras, I
-generally find a good village concert in the winter
-is sufficient to wipe off any deficit. We have a
-minimum subscription for the villagers of 2s. 6d. a
-year, which is readily paid when they find it is a <i>sine
-qua non</i>; but the rule must be rigidly enforced, even
-to the exclusion of your best bowler, if he prove
-refractory! The amount collected in this way is of
-course trifling, yet without it I believe the club
-would very soon stop for want of members; for it is
-the experience of all who have many dealings with
-their village neighbours, that they do not value or
-take any interest in the thing which costs them
-nothing. Free education has been a sufficient curse
-to our villages without giving them free cricket
-too! The rest of our income is collected by the
-lamplighting, shoemaking, groundman and umpire,
-who goes round with a book to all the houses in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_373" id="Page_373">[373]</a></span>
-the parish at what he considers the psychological
-moment, generally after dinner in the evening; for
-which extra labour he is accorded a commission of 1s.
-in the pound collected. The details of expenditure
-require no elucidation; they are the same in all
-cricket clubs; only the healthy countryman, with
-plenty of muscle, but no skill to apply it, will require
-at least twice as many bats every season as an ordinary
-cricketer. And mind you, they don’t go at the
-edges; they come right in half. Is it the stiff
-wrist? But when all is said and done, what fun it
-is! I have played most sorts of cricket&mdash;country-house
-cricket, club cricket, touring with my old
-school eleven, and so on, and once I even appeared for
-the county second eleven, when I was run out by a
-local tradesman before I had a ball; but none of them
-ever touched village cricket for pure, unadulterated
-amusement. My earliest recollection takes me back
-to a pretty little ground not far from Croydon, where
-a local schoolmaster enjoyed a great reputation as a
-demon underhand bowler. It was not so much the
-pace or the pitch that proved so disastrous to the
-batsmen, as the man himself. He <i>looked</i> destructive
-from the moment he began his run, and as soon as
-the ball was delivered he used to ejaculate fiercely,
-“That’s got yer!” Whether such a remark at such
-a critical moment was entirely in accordance with the
-customs of the game, it never entered our heads to
-inquire; we only knew it generally had the desired
-effect.</p>
-
-<p>It was on this same ground, I remember, that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_374" id="Page_374">[374]</a></span>
-Edward Norman, one of a distinguished family of
-Kent sportsmen, coming in last when his side wanted
-six runs to win, hit the first ball he received, a
-straight one well up, clean out of the ground to
-square leg, over the boundary road and a high wall
-into the kitchen garden of the local squire.</p>
-
-<p>Here too the head gardener of the same squire
-annually disports himself in spotless white, to his
-own huge gratification and the vast amusement of his
-numerous underlings. Not that they would dare to
-smile while the august eye is on them, for he is an
-autocrat in his way, and can both look and say
-unutterable things. Once, I remember, when he was
-taking part in a Married <i>v.</i> Single match, one of the
-under-gardeners had the misfortune to clean bowl
-him for a duck. He looked first at his shattered
-wicket, then at the spot where the ball had pitched,
-and proceeded to march solemnly towards the
-trembling and penitent bowler. We held our breath,
-fully expecting that some fearful tragedy was to be
-enacted, and that, having first brained the poor man
-with his bat, he would follow it up by giving him the
-sack on the spot. But when he had reached the
-middle of the pitch, he pulled himself together in
-the most dignified way, merely remarked, “Well
-bowled!” and stalked off to the pavilion. So even
-in his moment of defeat he was superior to most of
-us, for I have noticed it is generally considered
-etiquette in this class of cricket to <i>run</i> to shelter as
-fast as you can, if you have taken no exercise between
-the wickets.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-495.jpg" width="400" height="200" id="i374"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>VILLAGE CRICKET IN 1832.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-496.jpg" width="400" height="190" id="i375"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc33" summary="c33">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From the Painting by</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>R. Wilson, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>CRICKET AT HAMPTON WICK.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_375" id="Page_375">[375]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>It would be in the highest degree imprudent for
-any one in my position to say a word against country
-umpires. And, to give them their due, I have almost
-always found them, in what some would call these
-degenerate modern days, to be as accurate and as
-honest as their brethren in more exalted spheres;
-but there are brilliant exceptions! “To play eleven
-men and an umpire” is, I am told, a chestnut in
-Gloucestershire, and one story I can vouch for
-certainly bears out the theory. It was a match
-between two old-standing village rivals, and contrary
-to custom, the visiting team turned up with twelve
-men, owing to the unexpected arrival of a fairly good
-player. Another member of the team, conscious of
-his own weakness, but with perhaps more cunning
-than good-nature, promptly offered to stand down,
-“for,” said he, with a sly wink to his captain, “I
-can be of more use to the side if I umpire!” That
-comes from Gloucestershire, but it is easily beaten by
-the remark of the real umpire in a village match in
-Oxfordshire last August. “How’s that?” shouted
-the wicket-keeper proudly, as he captured the ball
-straight off the edge of the bat. “Not out,” said
-the umpire, “<i>but it was a damned fine catch if he hit
-it</i>.” I do not wish for a moment to insinuate that
-our friends in the north are not always the good
-sportsmen we believe them to be, so we will put the
-following tale under the head of “exceptions.” The
-match, a two-day one, was being played at Whitehaven,
-in Cumberland; things had gone badly with the
-home team, and all the morning of the second day the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_376" id="Page_376">[376]</a></span>
-local umpire had been engineering his opponents out
-in the most courageous way. But to everybody’s
-astonishment, when a confident appeal was made
-against the last man on the side, he gave him
-“Not out.” Struck by this sudden conversion,
-a friend asked him what the meaning of it was.
-“Well,” he said, “if I’d a given ‘im out, they
-wouldn’t ‘a stayed to loonch, and my father does
-the caterin’”!</p>
-
-<p>In one of the keenest matches I ever took part in
-(it was on the 16th of August 1902, and we won by
-four runs), two men of the opposite side were batting,
-one a very fair bat, and dangerous when set, the other
-a dubious quantity at all times. The bowler sent
-down a fast one to leg which the wicket-keeper failed
-to stop, and both men started for a bye. Meanwhile,
-short slip, backing up, had stopped the ball, and threw
-the near wicket down, while both men were apparently
-in the middle of the pitch. The good batsman
-refused to go, and the indifferent one apparently held
-no views on the subject, but stayed where he was,
-while the two umpires (I blush to record it) gave,
-almost unasked, an opinion favourable to their
-respective sides. Party feeling was running high,
-but I never allow any discussion in the field, and it
-was properly left to the umpire at the end where the
-wicket had been broken to give a decision. Unfortunately,
-it was their umpire, and the weak batsman
-had to go! And it was a fair decision. There was
-obviously a doubt, and he gave his own side the
-benefit of it. Who could do more? But we had our<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_377" id="Page_377">[377]</a></span>
-revenge on the gentleman who refused to go. He
-hit a lovely half-volley to square leg, which did not
-quite reach the boundary. My man was after it like
-a hare, and while they were trying to get the fourth
-run, he threw the wicket down full pitch from where
-he picked up the ball, at least 90 yards off, and with
-only one stump visible. A fluke, of course, but
-when I complimented him afterwards on his brilliant
-performance, which practically won us the match, he
-simply said, “Oh! that’s nothing, sir; I was always
-a bit of a slinger”!</p>
-
-<p>Our great annual event is, of course, the Married
-<i>v.</i> Single match, which takes place on the last
-Saturday of the season. In the old days, when we
-played on the Common, this was the occasion of
-what one might almost describe as a village orgie.
-Men turned up from everywhere, who never honoured
-the club with their patronage at other times, some
-even dressed, most appropriately, as clowns, and the
-cricket was distinctly of the “Dan Leno at the Oval”
-variety. Well, well, <i>Tempora mutantur et nos
-mutamur in illis</i>. It was doubtless very amusing,
-but there were objections, latterly even objectors
-(whether of the conscientious variety or not doesn’t
-matter), and the present tea-tent is in every way
-preferable to its rival “down the road.” So we play
-on our own field now, and get a very fair amount of
-amusement out of it, even without the clowns. I
-have tried for years to get up some sort of a representative
-married team before the day of the match, but
-it’s no use. They are all too old, or too stiff, or too<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_378" id="Page_378">[378]</a></span>
-busy. Yet when the eventful afternoon arrives, there
-are generally some fourteen or fifteen Benedicts ready
-to do battle for the honour of their wives and families,
-against a meagre dozen or so of the less fortunate
-Bachelors. Public enthusiasm, at all times keen in
-village cricket, reaches its high-water mark on this
-great day, and the ladies especially assemble in large
-numbers to do honour to the brave. Sympathy is
-invariably and entirely with the married men&mdash;I
-suppose because part of the audience are the wives
-of the team now stripping for the fray, and the other
-part hope that by next summer at latest they will be
-in the same proud position. On paper there can be
-no question that the Bachelors have the strongest
-side, but against their youth, their practice, and their
-skill we place our experience and our considerable
-numerical advantage, so there is not much in it. Then
-again, they look rather contemptuously at our weather-beaten
-ranks; say we have no bowling, can’t run (two
-of us are over seventy, certainly!), and are altogether as
-sorry a collection of prehistoric peeps as ever took
-the field. <i>Nous verrons!</i> The Bachelors win the
-toss and start batting. An old man of sixty-seven,
-who has recently contracted a second matrimonial
-alliance to make sure of his place in the team, asks to
-keep wicket, and after buckling on a pair of lovely
-old faded yellow pads, he goes to say “Good-bye” to
-his new “missus,” and get her to pull his waistcoat
-down and stuff it inside the back of his trousers
-(this I saw myself). Then I arrange the rest of my
-veterans in a sort of inner and outer circle round the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_379" id="Page_379">[379]</a></span>
-wickets, in places where they are least likely to be
-hurt, and the game begins. It is true we have no
-bowling, in the modern sense of the term, but it’s
-quite good enough for the Bachelors. At one end I
-put on our village umpire, who bowls fast straight
-underhand, literally “daisy-cutters,” and at the other
-a newly-married groom, just come into the parish,
-whose methods are precisely the same. Scoring is
-out of the question. You may stop the ball as long
-as your patience lasts, but you can’t get it away, and
-wicket after wicket falls, as the pick of my village
-eleven try in vain to turn fast sneaks into slow half-volleys.
-I feel quite sorry for them when the end
-comes, and twelve promising young cricketers, with
-“Mr. Extras,” have all been dismissed for 76.
-Then our turn comes, and the umpire and I make a
-good start by putting on 30 for the first wicket.
-But it’s not all over yet! Six wickets fall for an
-additional 9 runs, and the audience begins to hold its
-breath. We have still eight or nine batsmen, but can
-they possibly make 5 runs apiece? We are soon put
-out of suspense. The groom goes in for hitting,
-knocks up 15 in a few minutes, which demoralises
-the field, the best bowler is taken off at the critical
-moment, and the rest is easy. We have had a most
-thrilling afternoon’s cricket, and no one is any the
-worse except the old wicket-keeper, who is so stiff he
-cannot come downstairs for two days.</p>
-
-<p>I feel I ought to apologise for appearing in such
-august company as this book affords, but it is our
-cheery editor’s doing, not mine. My enthusiasm for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_380" id="Page_380">[380]</a></span>
-the subject is the only excuse I can offer, and that he
-has kindly accepted, so I need say no more. Only I
-shall always regret that no more capable pen than
-mine was found to do justice to such an inspiring
-theme as “Village Cricket.”</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-504.jpg" width="400" height="252" id="i381"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY CARICATURE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_381" id="Page_381">[381]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-505.jpg" width="400" height="247"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER XIII</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">FOREIGN CRICKET</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">P. F. Warner</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">In</span> this and the following chapters I shall endeavour
-to give some account of the many cricket tours
-in which I have been fortunate enough to take part,
-in the West Indies, the United States, Canada,
-Portugal, South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia.</p>
-
-<p>The days have long gone by since England was
-the only country in which the game flourished; for
-cricket is played, and played well, too, in the most
-remote corners of the British Empire.</p>
-
-<p>It has been my good luck to play cricket from Trinidad
-to Auckland, and from Buluwayo to Vancouver, so
-I hope there may be some interest in a record of the
-game under conditions widely different from those<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_382" id="Page_382">[382]</a></span>
-of Lord’s or Old Trafford&mdash;upon grounds that are
-within easy distances of volcanoes, and in towns that
-have since undergone siege and bombardment. In
-the course of my wanderings with bat and ball,
-I have covered nearly 80,000 miles by land and sea,
-and I have enjoyed every mile of my long journeyings,
-for the memories that one carries away from
-such tours as these are innumerable. May not one
-hope, too, that these touring teams are not altogether
-without value from the political side, for they must
-assuredly lead to a closer understanding and better
-appreciation of our kinsmen in Greater Britain.</p>
-
-<p>One hears nowadays so many remarks&mdash;as a rule
-far from complimentary&mdash;as to the status of amateur
-cricketers, that I take this opportunity of enlightening
-those whom it may concern as to the arrangements
-made with regard to the financial part of the six tours
-which are dealt with in this chapter.</p>
-
-<p>On the first tour to the West Indies we paid our
-own steamship tickets, and our wine and washing
-bills, cabs, etc., throughout the tour; all other
-expenses were paid by the clubs in the various
-islands. The trip to Oporto was a purely private
-affair, into which no question of expenses entered
-one way or the other. On my two visits to America,
-and the South African and New Zealand tours,
-all our expenses, excepting again our wine, washing,
-cabs, etc., were paid for us. Not one penny passes
-through the hands of either the captain or any other
-member of the team, and we have no interest whatever
-in the gate&mdash;that is the affair of the club<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_383" id="Page_383">[383]</a></span>
-which has invited the team out. The expenses of
-the tour are paid out of these gates, and the profits&mdash;and
-there is nearly always a profit&mdash;go to the body
-which has undertaken the risk of the tour. We are,
-in fact, the guests of the various places we visit.</p>
-
-<p>As captain of two teams in America, no money
-whatsoever passed through my hands. Our tickets
-were invariably taken for us, and we just stepped on
-to boat or railway, as the case might be. The hotel
-bills, with the exception of our bill for wine, washing,
-and smaller items, were sent in to the Associated
-Clubs of Philadelphia.</p>
-
-<p>Lord Hawke’s South African and New Zealand
-teams contained professionals, who, over and above
-their ordinary expenses of travelling and hotel bills,
-were guaranteed a lump sum of money, which was
-paid them by instalments. The amateur receives his
-expenses only; the professional his expenses <i>plus a
-lump sum</i>. There has been so much misunderstanding
-on this subject, that I shall, I hope, be
-excused for having dwelt upon it at some length.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">The West Indies</span></h3>
-
-<p>Before the visit of R. S. Lucas’s team in the early
-part of 1895, the West Indies were quite unknown
-to the majority of English cricketers. That tour,
-however, showed that there was plenty of cricket
-scattered over the islands, which only needed encouragement
-to develop into a good class; and such
-delightful accounts did Lucas and his team bring<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_384" id="Page_384">[384]</a></span>
-back of the West Indies, that Lord Hawke had little
-difficulty in getting together an amateur side to go
-out a couple of years later.</p>
-
-<p>We sailed from Southampton in January 1897,
-and after a pleasant fortnight’s voyage arrived at Port
-of Spain, Trinidad. Here we opened with a big score
-against the Queen’s Park Cricket Club, but came to
-grief when opposing the island team, chiefly owing
-to some excellent bowling by two black men, Woods
-and Cumberbatch, on not a very easy wicket of the
-kind where one ball bumped and the next shot. But
-admitting that they received considerable assistance
-from the wicket, Woods and Cumberbatch bowled
-excellently, and took thirty-nine out of the forty
-wickets that fell in the two matches. As it happened,
-these two defeats were the only ones we experienced
-in the fourteen matches which we played, and though
-I do not by any means wish to make excuses, Trinidad
-certainly caught us at a disadvantage, as we had
-not become acclimatised to the great heat, and, moreover,
-had not had sufficient opportunities to get into
-form. But the Trinidad side were a good one, their
-strength lying in their bowling. The batting was,
-with one or two exceptions, rather rough, but the
-fielding was excellent, and this, coupled with the
-bowling of Woods and Cumberbatch, proved too
-much for us.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket is, or was at the time I was there, established
-on a firmer basis in Trinidad than in any other
-of the West Indian islands, and the game was well
-supported by all classes.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_385" id="Page_385">[385]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>From Trinidad we went to Grenada and St.
-Vincent, where our opponents were no match for us,
-though the St. Vincent eleven ran us close for a
-couple of days. The match was played on a matting
-wicket, which played fast and true, though every
-now and again the ball turned very quickly.</p>
-
-<p>At Barbados we had two splendid games, one of
-which we won after a most exciting finish, and the
-other ending in an even draw. Barbados and Trinidad
-were certainly the strongest teams in the West
-Indies five years ago, and there was little to choose
-between the two sides, Trinidad having perhaps the
-stronger bowling, and Barbados the better batting.</p>
-
-<p>Antigua, St. Kitts, and St. Lucia were weak, but
-Demerara were a very fair side, though they did not
-show their true form against us. In the smaller
-islands, such as Grenada, St. Vincent, Antigua, St.
-Kitts, and St. Lucia, we invariably met black men in
-the opposing teams, but in estimating the respective
-merits of Trinidad, Barbados, and Demerara, it must
-not be forgotten that Trinidad played their black
-professional bowlers against us, while Demerara and
-Barbados did not. In the Intercolonial Cup, which
-is played for every other year between the above-mentioned
-colonies, the custom was to exclude the
-black professionals, but I am glad to say that this
-has been altered since I was in the West Indies, and
-they are now allowed to take part in the Cup competition.
-The admittance of black professionals into
-the best games cannot but do good, as they add
-considerably to the strength of a side, and their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_386" id="Page_386">[386]</a></span>
-inclusion must instil a universal enthusiasm for the
-game amongst all colours and classes of the population.</p>
-
-<p>Jamaica we did not visit, but I was told by more
-than one of the team which went out to the West
-Indies in the early months of 1901 that the cricket
-there does not attain to any high excellence.</p>
-
-<p>The wickets are not as a rule good, but there are
-exceptions, and the grounds at Barbados, Demerara,
-and Antigua provide excellent wickets in fine weather.
-It is hard enough to make runs on a sticky wicket in
-England, but it is easy in comparison with a West
-Indian wicket after rain, for under the influence of a
-powerful tropical sun, the ball not only takes any
-amount of break, but gets up perfectly straight as
-well. The Trinidad ground is the largest, and has
-the best pavilion and seating accommodation, while
-of the many grounds I have seen in various parts of
-the world, none surpasses it from a picturesque point
-of view; but the wicket is a very bad one, and I really
-think the authorities would be wise to lay down
-matting.</p>
-
-<p>The West Indian team which came to England
-in the summer of 1900 played seventeen games, won
-five, drew four, and lost eight, and when one considers
-that the team had never played together before, that
-they were quite unaccustomed to our climate, and to
-the strain of three days’ cricket, and that they lost
-the toss twelve times out of the seventeen matches
-the tour comprised, I do not think their record was
-at all bad. At the start the side were quite at sea,
-but they improved immensely as time went on, and
-towards the end of the tour showed some uncommonly
-good cricket. The result, too, of the
-visit of the last English team&mdash;by far the strongest
-of the three sides that have visited the West Indies&mdash;gave
-evidence that the cricket had improved in the
-islands, for out of the three test matches played, the
-West Indians won two, while Demerara twice defeated
-the Englishmen, and Barbados once.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-511.jpg" width="400" height="232" id="i386"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A PARLIAMENTARY MATCH.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn"><i>The Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, Lord John Russell, and others.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_387" id="Page_387">[387]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>At the same time, it was generally felt that West
-Indian cricket had not altogether made the progress
-expected. There are several good bowlers, notably
-Burton, the best bowler in the West Indies, and
-Woods of Demerara, Lane of Barbados, and Smith
-of Trinidad; but though the fielding is excellent, the
-batting is weak, and of real knowledge of the game,
-especially in the art of placing the field, there is little,
-while the idea is far too prevalent that they have
-nothing more to learn about cricket. This comes,
-I fancy, from their having on three or four occasions
-beaten the English elevens which have played in the
-West Indies, quite forgetting that these sides are
-never more than fairly strong amateur combinations,
-with no pretensions to being called first-class.</p>
-
-<p>From every point of view, there can be nothing
-more enjoyable than a cricket tour in the West
-Indies. The climate is, at the time of year we were
-in the West Indies, quite delightful, and although
-the sun is undoubtedly very hot, it is by no means
-harmful, if ordinary precautions are taken. Abler
-pens than mine have painted the exquisite charm and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_388" id="Page_388">[388]</a></span>
-beauty of the islands, and the hospitality of the
-people is beyond measure, the visit of an English
-team being an event which is eagerly looked forward
-to. The black portion of the population is especially
-enthusiastic. They climb the trees round the ground,
-and keep up a running comment on the game, and it
-is somewhat disconcerting to hear a huge shout of
-“Bowl him out, Clif,” go up as the bowler runs up;
-but this was what happened in Barbados when I was
-batting, “Clif” being Clifford Goodman, the great
-Barbados bowler. Lord Hawke was a source of joy
-to the native mind. On going out to bat he was
-generally greeted with shouts of “Welcome, my
-lord,” followed by an exhortation to the bowler to
-“give the lord a duck.” Once, indeed, at St. Vincent
-the bowler did not disappoint the crowd, for Lord
-Hawke retired first ball, whereupon the scene which
-followed was, I venture to think, unique. First of
-all the bowler turned a somersault on the pitch, a
-way of evincing delight at the dismissal of an
-opponent one does not usually see at Lord’s or the
-Oval; but after he had gone through his acrobatic
-performances, it was even more interesting to watch
-the crowd, who threw their hats in the air, danced
-about in front of the ring, shook hands with one
-another, chattering and shouting the while. It was
-the most extraordinary scene I have ever witnessed
-on a cricket ground; but the West Indian negro goes
-quite mad about cricket, and when A. E. Stoddart
-was in Barbados, hundreds of them used to gather
-round his hotel on a chance of getting a glimpse of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_389" id="Page_389">[389]</a></span>
-the great man. With more coaching from English
-professionals, and with a readier desire to assimilate
-the lessons taught, there is no reason whatever why
-cricket in the West Indies should not attain a high
-standard, for the West Indian seems to take quite
-naturally to the game, and the climate is admirably
-suited to the bringing of cricket to perfection.</p>
-
-<p>One or two of the grounds, notably that of
-Georgetown, Demerara, are well cared for, but,
-speaking generally, there is much ignorance displayed
-in the preparation of wickets, and it would
-be almost worth while to have some man out from
-England to put the various grounds in order, and
-impart instruction to the native groundsmen. The
-Trinidad ground is infested with mole crickets, and
-the wicket is so impossible that, unless matting is put
-down, cricket will languish, for no young cricketer
-can be taught to bat really well on such a wicket, and
-a bowler may be in danger of thinking himself a good
-one, when in fact he is only just beginning to bowl.</p>
-
-<p>My second tour was to America in the autumn of
-1897, when I captained a fairly strong team, which
-included, amongst others, G. L. Jessop and F. G.
-Bull, the latter about that time the best slow bowler
-in England.</p>
-
-<p>In discussing the strength of American cricket, it
-is as well to bear in mind that American cricket
-means Philadelphian cricket, for nowhere else in the
-United States does the game really flourish, though
-a few enthusiastic supporters do their utmost to keep
-it going in New York and Baltimore.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_390" id="Page_390">[390]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>In Philadelphia, base-ball is quite a secondary
-consideration, and there is a genuine enthusiasm for
-our great national game. The grounds themselves
-are superb, but the wickets are not good, though
-English cricketers are scarcely, perhaps, in a position
-to pass judgment on them, seeing that teams from
-this country never play in Philadelphia before the
-middle or end of September, when, owing to the
-abundance of what is termed “fall grass,” it is no
-easy matter to obtain a good wicket.</p>
-
-<p>The Philadelphian eleven, as I saw them on the
-occasion of my first visit, were a distinctly good
-side. They had quite a lot of batting, a brilliant
-wicket-keeper in Scattergood, and, in J. B. King
-and P. H. Clark, two bowlers distinctly above the
-average of amateur cricketers. King, indeed, on his
-day is a remarkably good bowler, while Clark has
-been almost invariably successful against English
-elevens. My eleven played two matches against the
-Gentlemen of Philadelphia. The first we lost by
-four wickets, and the second we won by seven
-wickets, though it is only right to say that in this
-game the Philadelphians were without J. A. Lester,
-the best batsman in the States.</p>
-
-<p>On the second tour to America, in September and
-October 1898, I had not, perhaps, quite such a
-strong team as in the previous year, but as the side
-included F. Mitchell, C. O. H. Sewell, C. J. Burnup,
-V. T. Hill, B. J. T. Bosanquet, and J. L. Answorth,
-it was not weak. On this, my last visit to America,
-the cricket in Philadelphia seemed to have fallen off.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_391" id="Page_391">[391]</a></span>
-J. B. King and P. H. Clark were as good as ever,
-Scattergood was the same brilliant wicket-keeper,
-and the fielding was absolutely A1, but the batting
-had gone off deplorably. Our first match was
-fought out on a sticky, difficult pitch, when we
-won very easily by eight wickets, hardly any of our
-opponents having any idea of playing on such a
-wicket. The return match was played on a good
-wicket, certainly by far the best I have seen in
-America, and again we won, but this time only
-after a desperate battle. When the sixth wicket
-went down, we wanted 30 runs to win, and as the
-side possessed a most distinct tail, the result was
-decidedly open to doubt. However, some fine
-hitting by Hill enabled us to pull through by
-four wickets.</p>
-
-<p>K. S. Ranjitsinhji and B. J. T. Bosanquet have
-both taken teams to Philadelphia since I was last
-there, but Ranjitsinhji’s eleven was absurdly strong,
-and won anyhow, though the Philadelphians had the
-worst of the luck in having to bat on slow wickets,
-on which they do not shine. B. J. T. Bosanquet’s
-eleven won one and lost one match with the
-Philadelphians, the Americans being seen to great
-advantage in the game they won, and quite outplaying
-the Englishmen, who lost by no less than
-229 runs. Bosanquet had, too, a very fair team,
-including E. M. Dowson, E. R. Wilson, R. E.
-More, F. Mitchell, and V. F. S. Crawford, but the
-Englishmen admittedly played very much below
-their true form.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_392" id="Page_392">[392]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>There seems to be more good cricket played in
-and around Philadelphia to-day than was the case
-some two or three years ago, and, generally speaking,
-the game seems on the up-grade, so that I shall be
-surprised if the team which is to visit England this
-summer does not prove to be the best that the
-Philadelphians have ever sent us.</p>
-
-<p>I have already mentioned that Philadelphia is the
-only place in America where the game has taken a
-firm hold, but New York has in M. R. Cobb a
-distinctly good cricketer. He is a very fair bat, and
-an excellent slow to medium right-hand bowler, of
-the type that one would wish to see more of in
-America, American bowlers being as a rule of the tearaway,
-erratic type. Cobb’s record against English
-teams is a very good one, and he was, next to J. B.
-King, the best cricketer I saw in the States in 1897
-and 1898.</p>
-
-<p>On my first American tour, except for a visit to
-Niagara, we did not go to Canada at all, but matches
-were arranged at Montreal and Toronto for the
-second trip.</p>
-
-<p>At Montreal we played against XIV. of Eastern
-Canada, and won by 88 runs; but the ground, which
-is used as a skating-rink for six months in the year,
-is appalling. There was a certain amount of keenness
-for the game, but to enable cricket to flourish, a
-cricket ground must be obtained.</p>
-
-<p>The ground at Toronto is a very fair one, and
-the Canadian eleven was certainly the best side we
-met, next to the Philadelphians, but little enthusiasm
-was shown, and cricket is not, I fear, in a very
-satisfactory condition.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-519.jpg" width="400" height="267" id="i392"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A MATCH AT IGLOOLIE, BETWEEN H.M. SHIPS “FURY” AND “HECLA”.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_393" id="Page_393">[393]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Outside Philadelphia there is, as I have pointed
-out, little or no cricket in America, but in
-Philadelphia itself the game flourishes, and our
-matches were followed with the greatest enthusiasm.
-The ordinary writer on cricket in America knows
-little about the game, but his headlines and comments
-are exceedingly amusing. We were invariably
-referred to as “British Lions,” and we were assured
-that the American girl had “just a little liking
-for sure-enough Englishmen.” Again, when the
-Philadelphians defeated us, one of the Philadelphia
-papers came out with a long leading article entitled,
-“Waterloo for Englishmen,” in which the fact that
-we had been beaten at our own game was duly
-rubbed into us.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket has many difficulties to contend with
-throughout the United States. In the first place, the
-Americans are a busy nation, and have no leisure to
-devote themselves as energetically as we do to cricket,
-while, except in Philadelphia, base-ball always has
-been, and always will be, the national game. But in
-Philadelphia the future of cricket is assured, for I
-have met there some of the keenest and most ardent
-followers of the noble game.</p>
-
-<p>A great many people would, I imagine, scarcely
-believe that cricket is played in Portugal; but
-wherever two or three Englishmen are gathered
-together, there will wickets be pitched and creases
-marked out, and as the English colony in Oporto<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_394" id="Page_394">[394]</a></span>
-numbers a few thousands, it is not surprising to find
-the game in full swing in the beautiful town on the
-banks of the Douro.</p>
-
-<p>It was as a member of T. Westray’s eleven that I
-had the pleasure of playing cricket in Oporto in the
-spring of 1898. Our captain, a former leader of
-the Uppingham team, had got together a very fair
-side, which, with L. C. U. Bathurst and H. R.
-Bromley Davenport to bowl, and R. N. Douglas and
-S. A. P. Kitcat as the principal batsmen, proved far
-too good for our opponents. We won the first
-match against an Oporto eleven by an innings and 103
-runs, Douglas making 106, and our two crack
-bowlers, with the assistance of A. C. Taylor, dismissing
-Oporto for 33 and 118. Our total was 254,
-but had the Oporto eleven possessed even a moderately
-good fast or medium-paced bowler, we should
-not have got 100, for the wicket was almost dangerous.
-I have a vivid recollection of being hit on the
-forehead by a slow half-volley which jumped straight
-up. The Oporto fielding was good, but the bowling
-very poor indeed, half-volleys on the leg stump and
-long hops being frequent.</p>
-
-<p>Our next opponents were Portugal, three Englishmen
-coming over from Lisbon to take part in the
-match; but here again we won almost as easily by
-an innings and 75 runs, though the cricket of our
-rivals showed some improvement, the bowling being
-of a better length, and the fielding decidedly surer.
-But cricket in Oporto is confined to twenty or thirty
-enthusiasts, so that the game cannot be taken at all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_395" id="Page_395">[395]</a></span>
-seriously. Something will have to be done to the
-wicket, which at present is deplorable, for the soil
-itself is very sandy, and plantains seem to take root
-again as fast as they are cut out. The best plan
-would be to lay down cocoanut matting, but the
-cricketers in the <i>leal e invicta citade</i> (the loyal and
-unconquered city) are rather proud of the fact that
-theirs is the only ground in Spain or Portugal in
-which a grass wicket is obtainable.</p>
-
-<p>None of the Portuguese took even the slightest
-interest in our visit, beyond a paragraph in the
-local paper stating that the “afamados loquedores de
-cricket” had arrived, and that the enthusiasm for
-cricket in England was even greater than that shown
-for bull-fighting in Spain, and that the names of
-Grace, Abel, Ranjitsinhji, and Maclaren were in
-England as well known as the names of Guerita,
-Marrantini, Perate, and Carajello, the famous bull-fighters,
-were in Spain.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_396" id="Page_396">[396]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-524.jpg" width="300" height="509"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER XIV</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">CRICKET IN SOUTH AFRICA</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">P. F. Warner</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">On</span> 3rd December 1898 I left England on my fifth
-tour abroad as a member of Lord Hawke’s South
-African team. The side was a powerful one, including
-such men as F. Mitchell, C. E. M. Wilson, the
-late F. W. Milligan, Trott, Tyldesley, Cuttell, Haigh,
-and Board.</p>
-
-<p>After a delightful voyage in the <i>Scot</i>, we arrived
-at Cape Town, and during the next four months
-played cricket from Table Mountain almost to the
-Zambesi and back again, visiting Johannesburg,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_397" id="Page_397">[397]</a></span>
-Pretoria, Kimberley, Port Elizabeth, Grahamstown,
-King William’s Town, Graaf Reinet, and Buluwayo.</p>
-
-<p>Lord Hawke’s was the fourth English team to
-go to South Africa, Major Wharton, W. W. Read,
-and Lord Hawke himself having in previous years
-taken out sides.</p>
-
-<p>In any review of South African cricket, the first
-thing to be remembered is that, from one end of
-the great continent to the other, you never by any
-possible chance see a grass wicket, matting being
-used everywhere. On the Newlands ground, Cape
-Town, and at Port Elizabeth, the matting is stretched
-over grass, and this makes a wicket which enables
-the bowler to get considerable work on, though the
-ball does not come off the pitch very quickly. It is
-not an easy wicket, for a half-volley does not seem
-the same thing as on grass, and forcing strokes
-generally are at a discount. This kind of wicket
-affords most excellent practice, for it teaches one
-above everything else to watch the ball.</p>
-
-<p>Tyldesley did make a very fine 112 at Cape Town,
-and Sinclair, the South African cricketer, an equally
-fine 106, but the ball nearly always beat the bat, and
-Haigh in particular brought off some great bowling
-triumphs. The work he used to get on the ball
-was prodigious; he thought nothing of pitching six
-inches outside the off stump, and then hitting the
-leg stump. Trott, too, did one or two fine performances,
-while Rowe, Middleton, and Sinclair were
-at times almost equally successful.</p>
-
-<p>At Port Elizabeth the out-field is of grass, but the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_398" id="Page_398">[398]</a></span>
-wicket seemed to me even more difficult than at
-Cape Town, for the ball, besides taking a lot of break,
-turned very quickly. Perhaps, however, I am unduly
-influenced by the fact that I made “spectacles”
-at Port Elizabeth&mdash;a favourite ground, by the way,
-for Englishmen to fail on, for more than one well-known
-cricketer has “bagged a brace” there.</p>
-
-<p>Cape Town and Port Elizabeth are the only two
-cricket grounds in South Africa which can boast of
-a grass out-field; all the other grounds are absolutely
-innocent of a blade of grass, being nothing, indeed,
-but a brown-reddish sand&mdash;somewhat like the colour
-of the sand on the seashore&mdash;rolled into a flat and
-hard surface. The matting is stretched on this sand,
-and makes a hard, true, and very fast wicket, while
-the ball, once past a fielder, simply flies to the
-boundary.</p>
-
-<p>The Wanderers’ ground, Johannesburg, is by far
-the best ground in South Africa, for the wicket is
-exceptionally fast, and the out-field level and true.
-At Kimberley there is a good wicket, but the out-field
-is rather rough, which may be said with truth
-of nearly all South African grounds, except the
-Wanderers’. Natal we did not visit, but I am told
-that the Maritzburg Oval is in almost every respect
-the equal of the Wanderers’ ground.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-527.jpg" width="400" height="278" id="i398"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>A STATE MATCH.</i></p>
- <p class="pcap"><i>The Duke of Wellington bowling out Lord Brougham.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_399" id="Page_399">[399]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>It will be seen from what I have said that matting
-wickets differ according as to whether they are laid
-on grass or otherwise. Matting stretched on grass
-gives the bowler more than a two-to-one chance, but
-matting on the bare grassless ground favours the
-batsman, though I am inclined to think that a really
-good bowler ought always to be able to make the ball
-“nip” a bit. Haigh certainly made the ball turn
-every now and again on the Wanderers’ ground, and
-both he and Albert Trott have told me that they
-would infinitely prefer to bowl on the best matting
-wicket in the world rather than on a really hard,
-true turf pitch.</p>
-
-<p>But the matting at Johannesburg is good enough
-for the most fastidious batsman, for it plays very
-fast, and though the pace of the wicket is apt to put
-a batsman off on first going in, once a man has
-got his eye in, he can make any amount of forcing
-strokes on both sides of the wicket, for the ball does
-not often hang on the pitch. Drives between cover
-and extra cover, and push strokes between the bowler
-and mid-on and past mid-on, can be made with great
-frequency, while the ball travels to the boundary at a
-great pace.</p>
-
-<p>Bowlers of the type of Haigh, Tate, or Howell
-(the Australian) are the most successful on matting
-wickets, but slow bowlers are not, as a rule, effective,
-and fast bowlers, unless really great ones, are usually
-heavily punished.</p>
-
-<p>The ordinary spikes one uses in England are
-quite useless on the matting, and have to be replaced
-by a sort of flat nail.</p>
-
-<p>The length of the matting varies in different
-places, and this, I venture to think, causes great
-inconvenience. At present the matting may be any
-length up to 22 yards, and often I found myself<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_400" id="Page_400">[400]</a></span>
-standing at one wicket with both feet off the matting,
-at another time with both feet on, and at another with
-one foot off and the other on the matting, while at
-Cape Town the pins which keep the matting down
-were placed just where the ordinary batsman puts
-his right leg. The South African Cricket Association
-might very easily pass a law making the matting
-uniform throughout the country, and in my opinion
-the matting should stop about a foot in front of the
-popping-crease. This is the length at Johannesburg.
-A captain may if he desires have the matting
-stretched tight at the commencement of each innings.
-In that case the pins are removed from the end and
-side of the matting, which is then well stretched by
-scores of Kaffirs, and afterwards firmly pinned into
-the ground. As a rule, however, merely the end
-pins are removed for a minute or two, the matting
-is given a pull, the pins replaced, and the matting
-swept, for pieces of grit and sand are very apt to
-collect on the mat, and a batsman has to look out
-for this while he is at the wickets.</p>
-
-<p>The great difficulty which frequently besets a
-captain on turf wickets, as to which roller he will
-put on at the commencement of his side’s innings, or
-at the beginning of the day’s play, is removed, for no
-rolling of the matting is necessary. Towards the end
-of an innings the matting is apt to get a trifle loose,
-and batting is no fun then, for should the ball pitch
-on one of the creases in the matting, it will probably
-break very quickly; and in this case the last few batsmen
-have the worst of the wicket. Winning or losing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_401" id="Page_401">[401]</a></span>
-the toss, of course, makes no difference whatever, and
-rain, too, has little or no effect on the state of the
-pitch. One great advantage of these sandy grounds
-is that play is nearly always possible within a few
-minutes after the heaviest shower. I have seen the
-Johannesburg ground absolutely under water and
-resembling a lake, and yet play in progress within
-three-quarters of an hour after the rain had ceased.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket on matting is not half such a good game
-as cricket on turf, but as there is no turf worthy the
-name in South Africa, South Africans have no other
-alternative but to play on matting. There is at first,
-to one accustomed to grass wickets, an air of unreality
-about the whole thing, and the game does
-not seem to be quite the same cricket we learnt in
-England. For the first few weeks I hated the “mat,”
-but after a while one becomes more at home on it,
-and at the end of the tour I was quite fond of a
-matting wicket&mdash;though I never could agree with
-those who said that they preferred it to grass. One
-thing is certain, and that is, that playing for three or
-four months on matting wickets does improve one’s
-batting, and makes one a more resourceful player. At
-Johannesburg, Kimberley, and the grassless grounds,
-forward play and hard forcing strokes score tremendously,
-but at Cape Town and Port Elizabeth forcing
-forward strokes are at a discount; the man who can
-play back well will make the most runs.</p>
-
-<p>Lord Hawke’s team played seventeen matches,
-won fifteen, and drew two. Five eleven-a-side
-matches were played, viz. two games <i>v.</i> All South<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_402" id="Page_402">[402]</a></span>
-Africa, two against Cape Colony, and one against
-the Transvaal.</p>
-
-<p>At Cape Town we played a couple of games with
-XIII. of the Western Province, the remaining
-fixtures being chiefly against XV’s.</p>
-
-<p>At Cape Town we just won our first match by 25
-runs against a Western Province XIII., chiefly owing
-to some grand bowling by Trott, Cuttell, and Haigh,
-the Yorkshireman taking five wickets for 14 runs at
-the crisis of the game. The highest total in the
-match was 149, and the highest individual score 45
-by H. H. Francis. Murray Bisset, who captained
-the South African XI. in England, batted well in
-both innings, and Rowe and Middleton took seventeen
-of our wickets between them.</p>
-
-<p>The return game saw us victorious by 106 runs,
-for we were all in better form by this time, and
-more accustomed to the eccentricities of the mat.
-Rowe and Middleton did even better than before,
-taking nineteen wickets between them, while Trott
-and Haigh bowled splendidly for us.</p>
-
-<p>From Cape Town we went in turn to Graaf
-Reinet, Port Elizabeth, Grahamstown, and King
-William’s Town, victory awaiting us at each place.
-At King William’s Town we drew lots for the order
-of going in, and F. Mitchell and Tyldesley put on
-over 100 runs for the last wicket; but the most
-interesting thing about this match was a splendidly-hit
-innings of 66 by Giddy, who scored his runs in
-three-quarters of an hour. He twice hit Milligan
-out of the ground, and scored 16 off one over of
-Haigh’s (there were five balls to the over at that
-time).</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-533.jpg" width="400" height="297" id="i402"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc34" summary="c34">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>Engraved by R. Dunkarton.</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>After W. Redmore Bigg, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>THE SOLDIER’S WIDOW OR SCHOOL BOY’S COLLECTION.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_403" id="Page_403">[403]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>We had a long railway journey from King
-William’s Town to Johannesburg, but after forty-five
-hours in the train arrived at the “Golden
-City,” where a warm welcome awaited us, the station
-platform being crammed with cricket enthusiasts.</p>
-
-<p>We stayed about three weeks in Johannesburg,
-and in that time played three matches&mdash;the first
-against a Johannesburg XV., which ended in a
-somewhat uninteresting draw; the second against a
-Transvaal XI., whom we defeated by an innings and
-201 runs; and the third against All South Africa,
-which we also won, though only after a desperate
-struggle.</p>
-
-<p>Sinclair batted and bowled well for the Johannesburg
-XV., and Halliwell kept wicket superbly, while
-Frank Milligan did a very good bit of bowling, for
-in the Johannesburgers’ first innings he sent back ten
-men for but 64 runs, keeping up a good pace all the
-time, and making the ball do a bit every now and
-again.</p>
-
-<p>In the match against the Transvaal, Tyldesley
-played splendidly for 114, Mitchell made an equally
-fine 162, and Trott knocked up 101 in a short time,
-our total of 539 for six wickets being, I believe, the
-highest total ever made in South Africa.</p>
-
-<p>We won the game against South Africa by 33
-runs, Lord Hawke’s XI. making 145 and 237, and
-South Africa 251 and 99. It was a splendid fight,
-and at one time we looked hopelessly “in the cart”;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_404" id="Page_404">[404]</a></span>
-but Trott, Haigh, and Cuttell bowled magnificently
-when our opponents went in to get the runs, while
-the fielding was extremely smart, and in our second
-innings I was lucky enough to get 132 not out. But
-fortune was on my side, as I was missed at point
-when I had made 94, and I rather fancy I was
-stumped when I had got about 70.</p>
-
-<p>For South Africa, Sinclair played a fine free innings
-of 86, and was unlucky in being run out, and Llewellyn
-got 38 in the first innings, and Bisset 35 and 21 not
-out. Llewellyn, Middleton, and Rowe, all left-handers,
-took the great majority of our wickets,
-and we ought really to have lost the match, but one
-or two of the South Africans played rather recklessly
-in their second innings, and the dismissal of Sinclair
-in the second over&mdash;caught at mid-off from a
-tremendous skyer, by Cuttell off Haigh&mdash;seemed to
-destroy the confidence of the side, though Bisset
-played some bowling of the highest class with great
-skill.</p>
-
-<p>The loss of this match was a tremendous blow to
-supporters of cricket in South Africa, and the disappointment
-in Johannesburg was keen. The game
-was followed with the closest attention, and on the
-second day about 8000 people were present, the
-takings at the gate, irrespective of stand money,
-amounting to £470. At Lord’s or the Oval one
-can see the best cricket in the world for the modest
-sixpence, but half-a-crown was the lowest sum one
-could get into the Wanderers’ ground for during
-Lord Hawke’s visit to Johannesburg. As a proof<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_405" id="Page_405">[405]</a></span>
-of the interest taken in the match, the scores were
-posted up at various centres in the town and along
-the reef at intervals of an hour.</p>
-
-<p>Just before meeting the combined South African
-team we had played a two-day match against a local
-XV. at Pretoria, whom we defeated by nine wickets.
-Braund, the Somerset professional, was at that
-time acting as coach to the Pretoria Club, and
-his all-round cricket was splendid, for he made
-41 runs, took six wickets, and brought off three fine
-catches.</p>
-
-<p>From Johannesburg we went to Kimberley, and
-there defeated a Griqualand West XV. by an innings
-and 25 runs. Most of us made runs, for the bowling
-was weak, and lent itself to free hitting. Shalders
-of Kimberley made 76 by very good cricket,
-late cutting and hooking particularly well, playing
-our professional bowlers with great confidence. The
-heat all through this game was almost unbearable,
-and we were glad to get away to the cooler
-climate of Buluwayo, where we played and won two
-matches, defeating a Buluwayo XVIII. and XV. of
-Rhodesia. Our bowling was altogether too good for
-our opponents, three or four of whom, however,
-showed good form. At this period of the tour
-Haigh was bowling superbly, and it took a really
-good batsman to make any runs against him.</p>
-
-<p>An expedition to the Matoppos was not the least
-interesting part of a delightful ten days in Rhodesia,
-and the visit of the first English team to Rhodesia
-was, I think I may safely say, a great success.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_406" id="Page_406">[406]</a></span>
-Certainly Lord Hawke’s team enjoyed every moment
-of it.</p>
-
-<p>On the way down from Buluwayo we played
-another match at Kimberley, which was spoilt by
-heavy rain, and then, after spending two or three
-days at Matjesfontein with Mr. J. D. Logan, we
-returned to Cape Town for the last two matches.
-We beat Cape Colony by an innings and 29 runs,
-Haigh performing the hat trick, and Cuttell and
-Wilson making 98 and 69 respectively, and on
-Easter Tuesday wound up the tour with a victory
-over South Africa; but, as at Johannesburg, our
-opponents headed us in the first innings, Sinclair,
-six wickets for 26 runs, being chiefly responsible for
-a miserable total of 92, a score which the South
-Africans headed by 85 runs. Sinclair played a really
-great innings. He made 106 out of 147 while he
-was at the wicket by splendid cricket, driving with
-great power, and repeatedly bringing off a powerful
-back stroke.</p>
-
-<p>Tyldesley (112) played in his best form in our
-second innings, and as nine men made double figures,
-we ran up a total of 330, which left South Africa
-246 runs to win. The general feeling was that we
-should win by 50 or 60 runs, but after Shalders and
-Powell had scored 11 for the first wicket, Haigh
-and Trott got on the war-path, and in an hour
-South Africa were all out for 35! Haigh took six
-wickets for 11 runs, and Trott four wickets for 19
-runs. Sinclair only made 4 this time, magnificently
-caught in the long field by Milligan.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_407" id="Page_407">[407]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>A few days later we left Cape Town on the
-<i>Norman</i>, leaving Milligan behind, of whom, alas!
-it had been written in the Book of Destiny that he
-should never return to England, for fifteen months
-later he gave his life for his country while fighting
-gallantly outside Mafeking, and his bright and fascinating
-personality was taken from the cricket field.
-He is buried at Ramathlabama, but, though he lies so
-far away, to those who knew him well, as I am glad
-to think I did, his memory is ever dear.</p>
-
-<p>The first English team to visit South Africa was
-Major Wharton’s, in the winter of 1888-89. In
-those days the railway had not, I fancy, reached
-even Bloemfontein&mdash;certainly there was no railway
-to Johannesburg, and much of the travelling was
-done by ox waggon. Major Wharton’s eleven
-played only two eleven-a-side matches&mdash;both against
-South Africa&mdash;and won both, the second by an
-innings and 202 runs.</p>
-
-<p>W. W. Read’s eleven beat South Africa in the
-only match played by an innings and 189 runs, and
-Lord Hawke’s first team won their three test matches
-quite easily, but his second team, of which I was a
-member, only just beat South Africa at Johannesburg,
-and in the return at Cape Town our opponents more
-than held us for two days. We did not lose a match on
-the tour, but three or four times we had to fight
-hard to win.</p>
-
-<p>The South African eleven which toured in England
-in 1901 did very fairly, showing plenty of sound
-cricket, and giving evidence that in a few years South<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_408" id="Page_408">[408]</a></span>
-Africa might hope to play the very best counties with
-every chance of success, while the good form shown
-against the Australians last autumn has gone far to
-strengthen the opinion which I had already formed
-that cricket has a great future before it in South
-Africa.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_409" id="Page_409">[409]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-541.jpg" width="400" height="116"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER XV</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">CRICKET IN NEW ZEALAND</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By <span class="smcap">P. F. Warner</span></p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">It</span> was on 12th November 1902 that I started from
-Liverpool as captain of a team for New Zealand.
-This was my sixth cricket tour abroad, and Lord
-Hawke was originally to have captained the side;
-but the sudden illness of his mother prevented his
-starting, and he did me the honour of inviting me
-to lead the side in his absence. Those, like myself,
-who have had the good luck to go on tour with
-Lord Hawke know full well what his absence meant,
-for his unrivalled powers of management, his tact,
-influence, and close attention to detail are important
-factors in the successful conduct of a cricket tour.
-Though the Yorkshire captain, to the regret of
-every one on the side, and of no one more than
-myself, was unable to accompany us, the team was
-everywhere known as “Lord Hawke’s team,” and
-we wore his colours&mdash;dark blue, light blue, and
-yellow&mdash;so well known on cricket grounds all over
-the world. The side Lord Hawke had got together<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_410" id="Page_410">[410]</a></span>
-was a good average English county team&mdash;that is
-to say, if it entered for the county championship it
-would at the end of a season probably be found halfway
-up the list, and possibly higher&mdash;and consisted
-of P. F. Warner, C. J. Burnup, F. L. Fane, T. L.
-Taylor, E. M. Dowson, B. J. T. Bosanquet, J.
-Stanning, P. R. Johnson, A. E. Leatham, A. D.
-Whatman, Hargreave, and Thompson.</p>
-
-<p>The <i>Majestic</i> of the White Star Line made a
-quick passage to New York, whence we were whirled
-across the American continent to San Francisco,
-learning on the way that railway speed in America
-does not necessarily imply safety, for we had a couple
-of accidents, one of which ended fatally to a fireman,
-which delayed our arrival at San Francisco. Here
-we spent a couple of delightful days, on one of which
-we played and defeated XVIII. of California. Leaving
-San Francisco on 27th November, we stopped on
-our long voyage across the Pacific at Honolulu and
-Pago Pago, eventually arriving at Auckland on
-16th December. A few days later we began the
-first match of the tour, and from then until 6th
-March we were kept pretty hard at work, travelling
-about the country and playing cricket. We played
-in all eighteen matches&mdash;eleven against odds&mdash;and
-won them all, not a single game being lost or drawn.
-This was in itself a wonderfully good record; but
-cricket in New Zealand is at the present moment up
-to no very high standard, and the results of three-quarters
-of the matches were a foregone conclusion
-before a ball had been bowled. We had a close<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_411" id="Page_411">[411]</a></span>
-game with a West Coast XXII. on a matting wicket,
-only winning by five wickets (on this occasion we
-had a long tail, for Bosanquet and Dowson were
-away fishing), and the Canterbury XI. and the New
-Zealand team in the first test match gave us a fair
-game; but we were almost always winning comfortably,
-most of our victories being gained in a
-single innings.</p>
-
-<p>The New Zealand XI. were a very fair side, but
-they were in no way equal to us, for we won both
-matches easily, the first by seven wickets and the
-second by an innings and 22 runs. In both of
-these games we lost the toss, though in the first
-match it was probably an advantage to do so.</p>
-
-<p>There were but seven eleven-a-side matches&mdash;against
-Auckland, Wellington, Canterbury, Otago,
-South Island, and the two New Zealand games.
-Auckland, South Island, Otago, and the second test
-match were won in an innings, Wellington were
-beaten by ten wickets, Canterbury by 133 runs,
-after declaring our innings closed, and the New
-Zealand XI. in the first test match by seven
-wickets.</p>
-
-<p>The two best batsmen in New Zealand are D.
-Reese of Canterbury and K. Tucker of Wellington;
-and it is remarkable that they should stand so clearly
-out from the rest. Of the two, Reese is, perhaps, the
-better. He scored two hundreds out of the eight
-innings he played against us&mdash;111 for Canterbury
-and 148 for New Zealand in the second test match
-at Wellington. He is undoubtedly a fine left-handed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_412" id="Page_412">[412]</a></span>
-batsman&mdash;very similar in style and method to H. G.
-Garnett of Lancashire&mdash;with all those brilliant off-side
-strokes so characteristic of nearly all left-handed batsmen,
-and particularly good on the leg side. His weak
-point is in the slips, where he is apt to give a chance
-on first going in. Besides his batting, Reese is by
-no means a bad left-handed slow bowler, and a
-beautiful field at extra cover&mdash;in a word, a thorough
-cricketer. Tucker is a sound batsman who watches
-the ball well, has a good off drive and cut just behind
-point, and a very clever stroke between mid-on
-and short leg, which he uses to great advantage.
-He nearly always got runs against us, scoring 84,
-50, 67, and 21 in four out of six knocks. On a
-rather difficult wicket at Christchurch, when our
-bowlers were turning the ball, he played very good
-and safe cricket&mdash;not so brilliant, perhaps, as Reese,
-but sounder, and a cool player. Leaving Reese and
-Tucker out of the question, there is no one in New
-Zealand who can be classed as a first-class bat. There
-are many very fair batsmen, who, with coaching, and
-with more practice and experience, would probably
-become first-class, but judged merely by what I
-saw, Reese and Tucker are the only two men whose
-batting attains to anything like first-class form.</p>
-
-<p>The bowling is infinitely stronger than the batting,
-and is really quite good, Callaway&mdash;whom Mr.
-Stoddart will remember as bowling well against his
-1894-95 Australian team&mdash;Frankish, Downes,
-Fisher, M’Arthy, and Upham being quite useful.
-Frankish and Fisher are left-handed medium<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_413" id="Page_413">[413]</a></span>
-pace, Upham is a fast right-hander, Downes slow
-right, and M’Arthy medium right.</p>
-
-<p>Frankish, in my opinion, is the best bowler in
-New Zealand, for he keeps a good length, being
-especially difficult to drive or force forward, and with
-a nice high action makes the ball swing a good deal
-with his arm. On all wickets I should consider him
-distinctly the best bowler we played against.</p>
-
-<p>Downes, even on a hard, true wicket, gets a great
-deal of work from the off on the ball, but his action
-is distinctly doubtful, and in the first test match he
-was twice no-balled by Charles Bannerman for throwing.
-He had bad luck against us in more than one
-innings, several catches being missed off his bowling.
-Downes is a splendid trier and a plucky, hard-working
-cricketer who can bowl all day quite cheerfully. On
-a sticky wicket he is bound to be very difficult, and
-it was on a pitch of this sort that he and Fisher dismissed
-the Australian XI. of 1896 for less than a
-hundred runs.</p>
-
-<p>Callaway keeps a very accurate length, and generally
-makes the ball go across with his arm, though,
-when the wicket helps him, he can bring the ball
-back pretty quickly. Upham and M’Arthy can
-both make the ball break, but they bowl too much
-at the leg stump, and not enough at the off and outside
-the off stump. Fisher has a good action, but
-does not like being hit, and is, perhaps, rather past
-his best.</p>
-
-<p>The wicket-keeping all over New Zealand is good&mdash;even
-in the smallest places we met a respectable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_414" id="Page_414">[414]</a></span>
-“stumper”&mdash;and Boxshall and Williams are above
-the average, both of them being particularly smart
-on the leg side.</p>
-
-<p>In the odds matches our opponents let an unwonted
-number of catches slip through their fingers;
-but the fielding of the New Zealand XI. was decidedly
-smart in both matches.</p>
-
-<p>The visit of the team undoubtedly did good, and
-cricket may be expected to go ahead rapidly in the
-next few years. More professional coaches from
-England or Australia are wanted, and greater efforts
-should be made to induce the Australians to send
-over teams. Lack of funds has in the past militated
-against the spread of cricket; but the New Zealand
-Cricket Council, who engineered the tour, and nearly
-all the local centres, made money out of the gate
-receipts, and as a keen enthusiasm has been aroused,
-improvement in the future should be rapid.</p>
-
-<p>There were too many matches against odds, and
-too much travelling and rushing about; but we saw
-New Zealand from end to end, and everywhere we
-were received with the greatest hospitality.</p>
-
-<p>One word more. The loyalty and devotion of
-my companions made the oft-times difficult task of
-captaincy a joy and a pleasure, and any success which
-may have attended the tour&mdash;and I think I may
-safely say it was a success&mdash;was due entirely to the
-support and confidence they at all times gave me.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-548.jpg" width="400" height="290" id="i415"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption">
-<table id="tc35" summary="c35">
-
- <tr>
- <td class="tdl"><i>From a Painting attributed to</i></td>
- <td class="tdr"><i>J. J. Chalon, R.A.</i></td>
- </tr>
-
-</table>
- <p class="pcap"><i>OLD CHARLTON CHURCH AND MANOR HOUSE.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_415" id="Page_415">[415]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-549.jpg" width="400" height="272"
- alt=""
- title="" />
-</div>
-
-<h2 class="p4">CHAPTER XVI</h2>
-
-<p class="pch">CRICKET GROUNDS</p>
-
-<p class="pca">By Messrs. <span class="smcap">Sutton and Sons</span>, The King’s Seedsmen, Reading</p>
-
-<p class="pn"><span class="beg">Without</span> wishing to detract from the skill of the
-many famous batsmen of to-day, or venturing to
-compare them with players of a generation ago, it is
-probable that the former owe some of their success
-to the perfect wickets on which most first-class
-matches are now played. No apology is needed,
-therefore, for embodying in this work practical notes
-on the formation and maintenance of really good turf.</p>
-
-<p>The soils on which a satisfactory cricket pitch
-cannot be formed are sand and an impervious clay.
-On the former it is difficult to establish a plant of
-grass, and under rain the latter becomes sticky. But<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_416" id="Page_416">[416]</a></span>
-loam which has been cultivated, especially when it is
-slightly tenacious, possesses all the qualities which
-favour the maintenance of fine perennial grasses, and
-at the same time enables the groundsman to prepare
-a firm and true surface.</p>
-
-<p>On sandy soil the grass obtains such a feeble hold
-that even after rain the pitch, as it rapidly dries,
-crumbles and becomes unreliable. No amount of
-rolling will bind a soil of this quality into a firm
-surface, capable of withstanding the severe wear of
-a cricket match. Should there be no alternative site,
-it is imperative that sandy soil be covered with several
-inches of stiff loam, inclining to the character of clay.
-When filled with grass roots, such a soil can be rolled
-down into a fast, true, and enduring wicket, and the
-porous subsoil will ensure effectual drainage. The
-club purse must determine the extent of ground to
-be treated in the manner we recommend, but while
-the work is in progress, it is worth while to strain a
-point to make the playing square sufficiently large&mdash;say,
-at the very least, 40 yards in the line of the
-wickets, by 30 yards in width.</p>
-
-<p>A different course must be adopted with adhesive
-land which has to be rendered porous. Possibly an
-effectual system of drainage, carried out by an expert,
-may be absolutely necessary; but this is a task which
-should not be undertaken with a light heart. It is a
-costly business, and the trenches take a long time to
-settle down. After a field has been levelled and
-sown, it is exasperating to see broad lines of soil
-gradually sinking below the general level, to the ruin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_417" id="Page_417">[417]</a></span>
-of the ground for one or more seasons. As a rule, a
-good playing square can be established on clay by
-taking out the soil to about 1 foot in depth and
-replacing it with 6 or 8 inches of mixed chalk
-and sandy loam. On the top, return enough of the
-original soil, broken very fine, and carefully beaten
-down, to ensure a perfect level,&mdash;the surface to be
-finished with the rake and roller. Making up the
-ground should commence in October, and work ought
-to be completed before the end of November. In
-the absence of frost, February is the month in which
-the best results can be obtained from the heavy roller.</p>
-
-<p>A slope is objectionable in many respects. It
-restricts the choice of a wicket, favours the hitting in
-one direction, and handicaps the bowlers. For these
-and other reasons, a level is justly regarded as one of
-the conditions from which stern necessity alone can
-warrant departure.</p>
-
-<p>Whether the entire area, or only the playing
-square, shall be efficiently prepared and sown generally
-resolves itself into a question of funds. Where
-the limitation is unavoidable we need not waste
-arguments. But it must not be forgotten that, however
-excellent the playing square may be, unless the
-ball can travel evenly to the boundary, first-class
-cricket is impossible. This fact is now recognised
-by comparatively small clubs, whose grounds are
-laid and kept with a precision that would have excited
-the admiration of county teams in years gone by.
-And the club which is content with a well-made
-centre and an indifferent margin deprives itself of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_418" id="Page_418">[418]</a></span>
-matches such as every ardent lover of the game
-desires to witness. It costs comparatively little more
-to prepare the whole area perfectly, and whatever
-saving may be effected by limiting the outlay for
-labour or for seed to the playing square is almost
-certain to be repented of.</p>
-
-<p>Apart from the ground, two reserve plots should
-be sown and kept in the same condition as a fine
-lawn. From these plots turf can be cut to mend
-holes made by bowlers or batsmen. When one plot
-has been used, the surface must be made up with
-3 or 4 inches of rich sifted soil, entirely free from
-stones; seed can then be sown and the sward be
-brought into condition while the other plot is cut
-away. Two or three years are necessary to mature
-the roots into a firm compact mat that may be cut,
-rolled, and relaid on the cricket ground.</p>
-
-<p>Cricket grounds are made either by laying turf or
-sowing seed. In favour of the former method it may
-be claimed that the ground is at once clothed with
-verdure, and under favourable circumstances the
-ground is sometimes ready for use in rather less time
-than when seed is sown. But the difference is
-scarcely worth consideration.</p>
-
-<p>Objections to the use of turf are so numerous and
-important that advocates of the practice decrease in
-number every year.</p>
-
-<p>As a rule, purchased turf abounds in coarse grasses
-and pernicious weeds, which are difficult to eradicate,
-especially the coarse grasses.</p>
-
-<p>When turf is laid in spring, the sections separate<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_419" id="Page_419">[419]</a></span>
-under a hot sun or drying wind, and the whole surface
-is disfigured by ugly seams. The gaping fissures
-have then to be filled with sifted soil and sown with
-seed.</p>
-
-<p>The objection most frequently urged against turf
-is its almost prohibitive cost. When cut to the
-usual size&mdash;3 feet long by 1 foot wide&mdash;nearly
-fifteen thousand pieces are required to lay an acre.
-The expense, including cutting, carting, and laying,
-generally falls but little short of £100. For the
-same area, seed of the highest quality can be obtained
-for about £5, unless for some urgent reason an
-unusual quantity is sown; even then, an increased
-outlay of 50s. will suffice.</p>
-
-<p>The labour involved in levelling the land and
-preparing a suitable surface is substantially the same
-for both methods.</p>
-
-<p>A sward produced from a mixture of suitable
-seeds is incomparably superior in quality to the best
-turf generally obtainable. Seeds of fine and other
-useful grasses are now saved with all the care necessary
-to ensure the perfect purity of each variety.
-The presence of extraneous substances of any kind,
-and of false seeds in particular, can be instantly detected.
-The percentage of vitality is also determined
-with exactness by severe and reliable tests. The
-several varieties of grasses can therefore be mixed in
-suitable proportions for any soil or purpose with the
-precision of a physician’s prescription.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_420" id="Page_420">[420]</a></span></p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Drainage</span></h3>
-
-<p>Should draining be necessary, this operation takes
-precedence of all other work in preparing the land.
-If rain pass freely through the soil, leaving no
-stagnant pools even in wet winters, the sufficiency of
-the natural drainage may be inferred. But it should
-be clearly understood that a fine turf cannot be
-established on a bog. Sour land soddened with
-moisture, or an impervious clay, must have pipes
-properly laid before good turf is possible, and as the
-trenches cannot be filled so firmly as to prevent the
-ground from sinking afterwards, draining must be
-completed at least six months before seed is sown.
-The size of the pipes must be determined by the
-rainfall of the district, the distance between the rows
-by the nature of the soil. The depth need not be
-great, as the roots of grass do not penetrate far into
-the earth. Fifteen feet between the rows, and the
-pipes three feet below the surface, are common
-measurements. No single drain should be very long,
-and the smaller should enter the larger pipes at an
-acute angle, to avoid arresting the flow of water.
-Near trees or hedges the sockets must be set in
-cement, or the roots may force admission and choke
-the drain, and the outflow ends should be examined
-periodically to ensure efficient working. In laying
-the pipes, it is necessary to employ a practical man
-who understands the business, and will consider the
-peculiar requirements of the case.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_421" id="Page_421">[421]</a></span></p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Preparatory Work</span></h3>
-
-<p>When no important alteration of the ground is
-necessary, deep cultivation should be avoided. Spudding
-to the depth of 6 to 9 inches will suffice,
-and this affords the opportunity of incorporating
-such manure as may be required. It frequently
-happens, however, that the surface does not present
-the desired conformation, and that a level plot can
-only be obtained by the removal or addition of a
-considerable mass of earth. Possibly the level may
-have to be raised by soil brought from a distance. In
-such a case it is usual to shoot the loads where needed
-as they arrive, tread the earth firmly down, and make
-the surface even as the work proceeds. This is the
-proper method if the whole bulk of soil come from
-one source, is uniform in quality, and suitable for the
-seed-bed. But in the event of there being much
-difference in the mould, it will be necessary to spread
-a layer of each kind over the entire plot, putting the
-retentive soil at the bottom, and reserving the finer
-and more friable portion for the top. To make up
-one part of the ground entirely with loamy clay, and
-another part with light loam, will inevitably result in
-a patchy appearance, because each soil fosters those
-grasses which possess affinities for it.</p>
-
-<p>In order to ensure a perfectly level surface, pegs
-must be driven into the soil at the extreme points,
-and intermediate pegs at regular distances between.
-On these a long piece of wood having a straight edge
-can be adjusted by a spirit-level, and by shifting the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_422" id="Page_422">[422]</a></span>
-wooden straight-edge from peg to peg, the level of
-the whole area can be efficiently tested.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Weed Seeds in Soils</span></h3>
-
-<p>A serious danger to which strange soil is liable is
-the presence of seeds of troublesome weeds. We
-have seen a lawn which had been made level with
-sifted soil taken from a neighbouring field. Upon
-every spot thus treated a strong colony of <i>Holcus
-lanatus</i> had grown, and as the pale green patches
-defied all efforts to extirpate them, the extreme
-course of cutting out and replacing with good turf
-had to be adopted.</p>
-
-<p>The only certain way of ridding soil of weed
-seeds is to burn it. This operation is well understood
-by agriculturists, and we should like to insist upon
-it as not only essential when adding strange soil
-upon which a cricket ground is to be made, but
-highly desirable whenever the land is a stiff clay, in
-which case burning is often worth undertaking, for
-the beneficial effect it has on the growth of grass.
-The disintegration of the clay, which is one of the
-good effects of burning, may to some extent be
-obtained by simply digging up the ground in autumn
-and leaving it rough for the frost to break down
-and sweeten.</p>
-
-<p>Should the proximity of dwellings render burning
-impracticable, the only alternative as regards the
-weeds is to allow their seeds plenty of time to
-germinate, and to destroy successive crops by light<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_423" id="Page_423">[423]</a></span>
-hoeings in dry weather. Of course, waiting for
-weeds to appear is vexatious when the land is prepared
-and the season is passing away. Still, it will
-prove a real saving both of time and labour to ensure
-a clean seed-bed. After grasses are sown the soil
-must not be disturbed, and atmospheric conditions
-may follow which retard the germination of the
-grasses, and too often doom the sowing to failure.
-Those who are practically acquainted with gardening
-know that land which has been regularly cultivated
-for years, and is supposed to be fairly clean, always
-produces a plentiful crop of weeds, although no seed
-whatever be sown, yet many a faultless lot of grass
-seed has been condemned, when the weeds have had
-their origin entirely in the soil. Delay in sowing
-offers the further advantage that the soil will become
-thoroughly consolidated&mdash;a condition which is highly
-favourable to grasses, and very difficult of attainment
-under hurried preparation.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Enriching the Soil</span></h3>
-
-<p>In preparing the seed-bed, the condition of the
-soil is too often disregarded, although it is a matter
-of considerable importance, for grass is quite as
-easily starved as any other crop. After the sward is
-established, the enrichment of the soil has to be
-effected under disadvantages to which other crops are
-not subject. Vegetables in a well-ordered garden
-are changed from plot to plot, so as to tax the soil
-for different constituents, and the ground is frequently<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_424" id="Page_424">[424]</a></span>
-manured, broken up, and exposed to atmospheric
-influences, which increase its fertility. Grass is a
-fixed crop, chiefly deriving its nourishment from a
-few inches near the surface, and the only way of
-refreshing it is by raking or harrowing and top-dressing.
-Hence there are obvious reasons for
-putting the land into good heart before sowing.
-Well-rotted stable manure is always beneficial, but
-fresh manure should be avoided, because of its
-tendency to make the soil hollow. From twenty to
-thirty cartloads of manure per acre will probably
-suffice.</p>
-
-<p>Where artificials are more convenient, 2 cwt. of
-superphosphate of lime, 1 cwt. of Peruvian guano,
-and 2 cwt. of bone dust, mixed together, make an
-excellent dressing. The quantities named are usually
-sufficient for an acre, and the mixture can be evenly
-spread and worked into the soil while the preparation
-of the seed-bed is in progress. Sutton’s lawn manure
-also contains all the constituents essential to the
-luxuriant growth of fine grasses and clovers. This
-is a highly concentrated artificial, and as a rule
-not more than 3 cwt. per acre will be necessary.
-After the application of the manure, not less than ten
-days should elapse before sowing the grasses, or some
-of the seed-germs may be destroyed.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Surface Preparation</span></h3>
-
-<p>A fine friable surface is necessary to ensure
-favourable conditions for the seed, and in levelling<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_425" id="Page_425">[425]</a></span>
-the ground there must be a diligent use of the rake
-and roller. It is not sufficient to go over the ground
-once with each implement. Repeated raking assists
-in clearing the land of stones, unless they are very
-numerous, in which case it may be necessary to
-spread 2 or 3 inches of fine rich earth over the
-surface. After every raking the roller should follow,
-each time in a different direction. These operations
-reveal inequalities, pulverise the soil, and impart to it
-the firmness which favours germination. Grasses,
-particularly the finer varieties, are too fragile to force
-their way through clods, and many seeds will be lost
-altogether if buried to a greater depth than a quarter
-of an inch.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Selection of Seeds</span></h3>
-
-<p>The selection of grasses and clovers which are to
-form a fine dense sward should be regarded as in the
-highest degree important. They must be permanent
-in character, adapted to the soil, and free from
-coarse-growing varieties. On land which is liable to
-burn, clovers maintain their verdure under a hot sun
-after grasses have become brown. There is, however,
-this objection to clovers, that they show signs of
-wear earlier than grasses, and hold moisture longer
-after a shower. It is therefore often advisable to
-sow grasses only, unless the grass is peculiarly liable
-to scorch in summer. Then it is an open question
-whether an admixture of clovers may be regarded as
-the lesser of two evils.</p>
-
-<p>The following grasses and clovers are specially<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_426" id="Page_426">[426]</a></span>
-suited for establishing a fine close turf, and the characteristics
-of the several varieties indicate the soil and
-purpose for which each kind is naturally adapted:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p><i>Cynosurus cristatus</i> (Crested Dogstail).&mdash;The
-foliage of this grass is dwarf, compact in growth, and
-possesses the great advantage of remaining green for
-an unusual time in the absence of rain. The roots
-are capable of penetrating the hardest soil, and the
-plant is well adapted for sowing on dry loams,
-especially such as rest upon a chalky subsoil, for
-which it manifests a marked partiality. Still, it will
-thrive almost anywhere, and should form a prominent
-constituent of most prescriptions for cricket grounds.
-Crested Dogstail is strictly perennial, and will increase
-in strength and vigour for quite two years
-after it is sown.</p>
-
-<p><i>Festuca duriuscula</i> (Hard Fescue).&mdash;This grass
-grows freely on sheep downs, and when mingled in
-due proportion with other varieties it largely contributes
-to the formation of a fine close turf. The
-plant commences growing early in spring, and seed
-should be sown on all soils that are not very wet.</p>
-
-<p><i>Festuca ovina tenuifolia</i> (Fine-leaved Sheep’s
-Fescue).&mdash;The foliage of Fine-leaved Sheep’s Fescue
-maintains its dark green colour for some time in hot
-dry weather, and is so slender as to render the term
-“blades of grass” almost a misnomer. Although
-most useful in mixture with other grasses, a homogeneous
-turf cannot be obtained from Fine-leaved
-Sheep’s Fescue alone. The plants grow in dense
-tufts, and exhibit a decided antipathy to each other.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_427" id="Page_427">[427]</a></span>
-The roots descend to a considerable depth in search
-of moisture. As a consequence, this grass will thrive
-on sandy or rocky soils that are incapable of supporting
-any other variety. In the early stage of growth
-it is easily overpowered by weeds, and for this reason
-autumn is preferable to spring sowing, because weeds
-are then less prevalent. But for cricket grounds
-this grass cannot be dispensed with, at whatever time
-of year a sowing may be made. After the plants are
-established they easily hold their position.</p>
-
-<p><i>Festuca rubra</i> (Red Fescue) possesses many desirable
-qualities, which give it a peculiar value. The
-foliage is very fine, close-growing, endures hard
-wear, and the plant is not exacting as to habitat. It
-thrives on the driest and poorest soils as well as on
-the best loams. The true variety is quite distinct
-from either of the other fine-leaved Fescues, and
-pure seed is difficult to obtain.</p>
-
-<p><i>Lolium perenne Suttoni</i> (Sutton’s Dwarf Perennial
-Rye Grass).&mdash;Most of the perennial rye grasses are
-too coarse for a cricket ground, but this variety is
-eminently suitable for the purpose, alike for the fineness
-of its foliage and the dwarf branching habit of
-growth. It tillers out close to the ground, forms a
-compact sward, and retains its verdure throughout
-the year, unless burnt by excessive drought, from
-which it speedily recovers. The quick maturity
-of this grass is another advantage, as it occupies
-the ground while slower-growing varieties are
-developing.</p>
-
-<p><i>Poa pratensis</i> (Smooth-stalked Meadow Grass).&mdash;Although<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_428" id="Page_428">[428]</a></span>
-somewhat shallow-rooted, this grass endures
-drought remarkably well. Light land, rich in
-humus, is its favourite resort, and it will also grow,
-but not with the same freedom, on heavy soil. The
-plant does not develop its full proportions in the
-first season.</p>
-
-<p><i>Poa trivialis</i> (Rough-stalked Meadow Grass) is
-somewhat similar in appearance to <i>Poa pratensis</i>, but
-instead of being adapted to dry, light soils, it flourishes
-in strong, moist situations, and unless the land contains
-abundance of potash and phosphoric acid, the
-plant speedily disappears.</p>
-
-<p><i>Poa nemoralis</i> (Wood Meadow Grass).&mdash;From the
-perpetual greenness and dwarf close-growing habit of
-this grass, it is admirably suited for cricket grounds.
-The growth commences very early in spring, and it
-is one of the best grasses for enduring drought.</p>
-
-<p><i>Trifolium repens perenne</i> (Perennial White Clover)
-is indigenous all over the country, and may
-be seen growing freely by roadsides; indeed, it
-grows better in poor than in rich land. The seed
-will lie dormant at some depth in the soil, and yet
-germinate freely when brought to the surface.
-Perennial White is one of the clovers most frequently
-sown on lawns and cricket grounds; when
-constantly mown and rolled, it produces a dense mass
-of herbage.</p>
-
-<p><i>Trifolium minus</i> (Yellow Suckling Clover).&mdash;This
-is a quick-growing plant, showing abundantly in
-summer, just when the grasses are thin and the dense
-foliage of clover is most welcome.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_429" id="Page_429">[429]</a></span></p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Quantity of Seed</span></h3>
-
-<p>We need scarcely allude to the necessity of sowing
-new and pure seed, strong in germinating power.
-Seeds of the grasses and clovers suitable for producing
-a fine turf are nearly all expensive, some of them
-very expensive. But as fine grasses do not tiller out
-to the same extent as the larger pasture varieties, a
-liberal seeding is imperative. We recommend a
-sowing of four bushels per acre, and should the
-ground be wanted in the shortest possible time, the
-quantity may with advantage be increased to five or
-six bushels per acre. The additional outlay will be
-well repaid by the rapid clothing of the ground;
-and in favour of thick seeding it may be urged that
-the more closely the plants are crowded the finer will
-be the herbage.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Sowing</span></h3>
-
-<p>Grass seeds may be sown at any time between the
-middle of March and the end of September. But
-from the latter half of May on to about the second
-week in August, hot, dry weather often proves destructive
-to the young plants. They cannot acquire
-sufficient stamina to endure continued drought or
-fierce heat, unless constant watering is possible, and
-it is not conducive to sweetness of temper to see
-a good plant wither away. From the middle of
-March to the first week of May is the best period
-for spring sowing, the earlier the better; and from
-about 10th August to the middle of September for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_430" id="Page_430">[430]</a></span>
-summer or autumn sowing. The clovers from an
-autumn sowing are liable to destruction by a severe
-winter, even if slugs spare them. Should there be
-failure from any cause, seed must be sown in the
-following spring.</p>
-
-<p>The seeds can be more evenly distributed by two
-sowings than by one, however skilled and practised
-the sower may be; and the second sowing should
-cross the first at right angles. The finer grass seeds,
-being small and light, are readily blown to a distance
-by a high wind; a quiet time should therefore be
-chosen, and the workman must keep his hand low.
-On large plots the seed-barrow can be used with
-advantage, but even here we recommend two sowings,
-instead of entrusting all the seed to a single operation.
-Where the work of preparing the ground
-has been continuous, seed may be sown immediately
-the bed is ready. The whole plot must then be
-lightly raked once more, with the object of covering
-as many seeds as possible. Those which are deeply
-buried will not germinate, and those which are exposed
-may be scorched by the sun, or consumed by
-birds. As a finish put the roller over twice, first
-north and south, then east and west, and it must be
-done carefully, for on every spot missed by the
-roller the grasses will fail. Good work will leave
-the surface almost as smooth and true as a billiard
-table.</p>
-
-<p>It frequently happens that the preparation of the
-seed-bed is completed in advance of the proper time
-for sowing, and the plot is allowed to lie fallow. In<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_431" id="Page_431">[431]</a></span>
-such cases, through the fall of rain, or some other
-cause, the surface becomes set, and it is necessary to
-break the top crust into a fine friable condition before
-the seed can be sown with a fair prospect of success.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Worm-Casts</span></h3>
-
-<p>In a very short time a thick sprinkling of worm-casts
-will be observed. We have no desire to call in
-question the general service rendered by these lowly
-creatures, but their movements in ground newly
-sown for a lawn or cricket ground are unquestionably
-mischievous, and the injury they cause will be greater
-in proportion to the looseness of the soil. A well-made,
-firm seed-bed is less liable to injury than one
-that has not been properly consolidated by the
-roller. Upon old turf the cast is thrown up from a
-well-defined orifice seldom exceeding a quarter of an
-inch in diameter. Worms loosen the soil of a newly-made
-seed-bed for a considerable distance round each
-burrow, and on this broken earth not a seed will
-germinate. It would be comparatively unimportant
-if the casts were few and far between, but generally
-hundreds of them may be seen on a pole of ground.</p>
-
-<p>When and how the casts should be dealt with is
-sometimes a source of perplexity. A few days after
-sowing, a light roller will gather them up, if moist,
-and the implement must be scraped at the end of
-every run. When the casts are dry, the roller will
-crush them and remain clean. This light rolling
-may be repeated once or twice, if necessary, always<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_432" id="Page_432">[432]</a></span>
-taking care not to break the surface either with the
-foot or the roller. After the first fine spears of grass
-begin to show, it is generally unwise to touch the
-bed until the scythe or mower comes into use.</p>
-
-<p>Those who care to rid the soil of worms, either
-before sowing or after the grass is established, may
-do so by means of water strongly impregnated with
-newly-burned lime. Fill a barrel with water, add as
-much lime as the water will absorb, stir briskly, and
-then allow the lime to settle. The clear fluid, freely
-used from an ordinary water-can, will bring the
-worms from their burrows in hundreds, and at the
-same time benefit the grass. The worms should be
-collected and destroyed in salt water.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Water and Shade</span></h3>
-
-<p>When severe and prolonged drought succeeds the
-sowing, there is a possibility that the seeds may be
-“malted.” In spring the soil is generally moist
-enough to start seed-germs, but during continued
-dry weather growth is arrested, and the fragile
-seedlings wither away. As a rule, the watering of
-newly-sown land is to be avoided, but it may become
-a necessity if the grass is to be saved. A small plot
-can easily be watered by hose, or even by the water-can
-fitted with a fine rose. A large area presents
-difficulties, especially in the absence of hose, or if
-water has to be carried a considerable distance. In
-any case there must be no rude trampling on the
-soil. Flat boards laid at intervals, and ordinary care,
-will prevent injury from the traffic. The water must
-be delivered in a fine spray, and for a sufficient time
-to prevent the necessity of a second application.
-Still, watering is an evil at best, and one means of
-avoiding it altogether is to cover the entire surface,
-immediately after sowing, with a thin layer of cocoanut
-fibre, which will screen the soil from burning
-sunshine, check rapid evaporation, and foster the
-slender blades of grass as they rise. There is no
-occasion to remove this slight protection, for it will
-prove an advantage long after the grass has grown
-through it. To some extent the fibre is also a
-defence against the depredations of birds.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-567.jpg" width="400" height="539" id="i432"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>CRICKET’S PEACEFUL WEAPONS.</i></p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
- <img src="images/ill-568.jpg" width="400" height="490" id="i433"
- alt=""
- title="" />
- <div class="caption"><p class="pcap"><i>THE END OF THE INNINGS.</i></p>
- <p class="pcapn">(<i>WILLIAM BELDHAM, b. 1766, d. 1862</i>)</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_433" id="Page_433">[433]</a></span></p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Bird Scares</span></h3>
-
-<p>Sparrows and several of the finches are particularly
-partial to grass seeds, and they do mischief in other
-ways. The birds break up the surface, eat until
-surfeited, and then take a dust-bath. There are
-many methods of scaring them, and some plan must
-be adopted to preserve the seed from these marauders.</p>
-
-<p>Small plots can be protected by nets, but on a
-large scale this mode of defence is, of course, out of
-the question. One cheap scare is to connect lengths
-of twine to tall stakes, and at intervals hang strips of
-glittering tin, slightly twisted, in order that they
-may be freely turned by the wind. Another remedy
-is to make an example of some of the pirates, and
-hang them up as a warning. When the sown area
-is extensive, it should be watched by a lad until the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_434" id="Page_434">[434]</a></span>
-plant appears. He must be an early riser, and if it
-will not prove a nuisance, he may be entrusted with
-a gun and a few blank cartridges.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Mowing</span></h3>
-
-<p>While the plant is quite young, it should be
-topped with a sharp scythe. This will encourage
-the grasses to tiller out and their roots to fill the soil.
-At brief intervals the cutting should be repeated, and
-for this early work on the tender grass the scythe is
-unquestionably preferable to the mowing machine.
-Indeed, the risk of injury from the mower is so great
-that many practical men condemn its employment
-until the plant is fairly established. But the condition
-of the machine must be taken into account.
-We have successfully used a mower for the very
-first cutting, having previously ascertained by a trial
-on old grass that the cutters were in perfect order.</p>
-
-<p>In the judicious use of the mower lies one secret
-of a close sward. During severe winter weather the
-implement may not be wanted for several weeks, but
-as spring advances the ragged plant should have
-attention, and the necessity for more frequent cutting
-will be evident, until in warm, moist weather, twice a
-week, and possibly, for a brief period, every other
-day, may not be too often. No rigid law can be
-laid down on this point. The grass should never
-wear a neglected appearance, nor should the work on
-any account be postponed to a more convenient
-season. Setting the mower requires the exercise of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_435" id="Page_435">[435]</a></span>
-judgment. It should never be so low as to graze
-the surface, and in summer, during scorching sunshine,
-it will be advisable to raise the cutter a trifle higher
-than for strong spring growth.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Rolling</span></h3>
-
-<p>Next in importance to mowing comes the use of
-the roller, without which it is impossible to establish
-a fine close turf, or to maintain it in high condition.
-After the first cutting of the young grass, the whole
-plot must be gently compressed with a rather light
-roller, and the work needs care, because the bed is
-easily broken by a clumsy foot. Subsequent cuttings
-to be followed by the roller until the plant is capable
-of bearing a heavier implement, which should not
-always be used in the same direction.</p>
-
-<p>When the soil becomes hard through dry weather,
-rolling can do no good, and during frost it will be
-injurious; but in spring and autumn the frequent
-use of a rather heavy roller will have a visibly
-beneficial effect on the grass.</p>
-
-<p>The best rollers are constructed with two cylinders,
-having the outer edges rounded. The division of
-the cylinder facilitates turning, and the rounded
-edges prevent unsightly marks.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Destruction of Weeds</span></h3>
-
-<p>After the most careful preparation of the land,
-annual weeds are certain to appear, and every weed,
-if left alone, will choke a number of the surrounding<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_436" id="Page_436">[436]</a></span>
-grasses. Frequent mowing checks these weeds, but
-plantains, thistles, and dandelions must be taken up,
-each one singly, about an inch below the surface.
-A pinch of salt dropped upon the cut root will
-effectually prevent new growth. The lad who does
-this work should understand what he is about, for a
-plantain merely cut off below the collar will send
-out half-a-dozen shoots, in the same manner as sea
-kale, and prove a greater nuisance than the original
-crown; and the careless use of salt will kill a lot of
-grass plants. Daisies should be lifted separately,
-each plant with its root entire, and although new
-growth will here and there appear for a second or
-even a third time, the daisies will be weaker, and a
-little perseverance will speedily rid a large grass plot
-of every one of them. Another efficient mode of
-eradicating weeds is to dip a wood skewer into
-sulphuric acid, strong carbolic acid, or one of the
-liquid weed destroyers, and then plunge the skewer
-perpendicularly into the heart of the plant. The
-result is deadly and instantaneous; but the use of
-these destructive fluids needs great care to avoid
-personal injury or the burning of holes in clothing.
-The bottle containing the liquid must be kept in a
-place of security.</p>
-
-<p>In extirpating weeds there is nothing like system.
-Instead of aimlessly wandering hither and thither, it
-is more economical in time and labour to mark off
-with a garden line a strip six feet wide, and clear
-the weeds from the enclosure. Follow with successive
-strips until the whole surface has been dealt<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_437" id="Page_437">[437]</a></span>
-with, and it is surprising how quickly a large area
-may be divested of weeds.</p>
-
-<p>After sowing grass seeds, how soon will the
-ground be fit for use? is a question frequently asked.
-No definite answer can be given. The time depends
-on the period of the year, the weather which follows
-the sowing, and the attention bestowed on the rising
-plant. To these influences must be added the nature
-of the soil, aspect, and district. In August or early
-September, sowing should produce, under favourable
-circumstances, and with generous treatment, a good
-turf during the following summer. Spring sowings
-are specially subject to the vicissitudes of the season.
-When the atmosphere is genial and the plot receives
-due attention, the plant rapidly fills the soil,
-and a thick sward results towards the end of July
-or the beginning of August. But it is desirable
-not to subject it to hard use until the following
-year.</p>
-
-<p>Except the final mowing and light rolling on the
-morning of the match, wickets should be prepared
-three days in advance. It is often fatal to good
-cricket to employ the heavy roller on the day the
-match commences. Should the grass be so dense as
-to make the wicket slow, a broom deftly used,
-followed by a hand mower, run several times between
-the wickets and across the ground also, will affect a
-marked improvement in the pace. The preparation
-can be finished with the small roller.</p>
-
-<p>Plantains should never be tolerated on a cricket
-ground. When the ball happens to fall on the centre<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_438" id="Page_438">[438]</a></span>
-of one of these plants, it may travel in the most
-erratic manner.</p>
-
-<p>Many cricket grounds are grazed with sheep, and
-if the animals are at the same time fed with cake,
-this is one of the simplest and most effectual means
-of maintaining the sward in a luxuriant condition.
-But we have seen sheep do immense mischief on light
-sandy ground, where their quick snatching mode of
-feeding readily uproots the plants. Of course the
-work of mowing is greatly reduced when sheep can
-with safety be allowed to graze. It must, however,
-be distinctly understood that without cake the sheep
-add nothing to the fertility of the soil.</p>
-
-<h3><span class="smcap">Improving Cricket Grounds</span></h3>
-
-<p>As a rule, every cricket ground should be liberally
-manured in spring, with the artificials as recommended
-above; and before or at the close of each
-season&mdash;certainly not later than the middle of September&mdash;fine
-grass seeds should be sown over the
-worn parts of the turf. If the sowing can be made
-early in September, the grasses will have several
-months in which to become established, and for this
-reason sowing in autumn on a cricket ground is
-generally preferable to sowing in spring.</p>
-
-<p>As a preliminary, the surface must be raked or
-harrowed to provide a seed-bed. Then sow renovating
-seeds at the rate of not less than one bushel per
-acre, making two operations of the work to ensure
-regular distribution. Rake or harrow in the seeds<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_439" id="Page_439">[439]</a></span>
-to cover as many as possible, and finish with a careful
-rolling.</p>
-
-<p>Newly-made cricket grounds sometimes show
-depressions after the grass is up. Where these are
-shallow, an occasional sifting of fine loam may follow
-the mowing, and with patient attention a true surface
-can be restored; but a quantity of soil, roughly
-thrown down, will smother the rising plant. Should
-the hollows be deep, a different procedure becomes
-necessary. Young grass cannot be cut and rolled in
-the manner usual with an established sward, and if
-holes are filled with a thick covering of earth, it is
-necessary to re-sow and follow with the mower and
-roller, as already advised. But if the plant is fairly
-thick, it may perhaps be possible to cut the young
-turf in small square sections, and lift each one
-separately by means of a thin flat board or piece of
-zinc. After making good the level, the pieces of
-turf can, with care, be restored without much injury.
-As a finish, lightly touch the surface with the flat
-beater, and spray over it two or three cans of
-water.</p>
-
-<p>Inequalities in old turf can be remedied by a
-simpler mode of treatment. Across the hollow spot,
-cut strips 10 or 12 inches wide, and roll back
-the sward from the centre. Make the bed perfectly
-level, leaving the soil with a firm but crumbled
-surface; then restore the turf, which will be found
-rather too long for the space, and tenderly compress
-it into the original position; beat carefully down,
-give a soaking of water, and in due time mow and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_440" id="Page_440">[440]</a></span>
-roll. In a few days no trace of the operation will be
-visible, but the grass ought not to be roughly used
-until it is thoroughly re-established.</p>
-
-<p>Fairy rings are sometimes troublesome. They
-are caused by several kinds of fungus. When these
-decay, the soil becomes charged with nitrogenous
-matter, and a dark green spot of grass is the result.
-The mycelium exhausts the soil of the constituents
-which are essential to the existence of the fungi, and
-as new supplies of food can only be found on fresh
-ground, the spot becomes a circle, which annually
-increases in circumference, until it either breaks up
-or the fungi are exhausted. No direct remedy is
-known, but it has been observed that lawns which
-are liberally dressed every spring with stimulating
-manure produce dark green herbage, closely resembling
-the fairy rings in colour. As a consequence
-the circles are less conspicuous, and they also show
-a tendency to disappear under the effects of the
-manure.</p>
-
-<p>Moss is generally a sign of poorness of soil, and
-sometimes indicates the need of drainage. But before
-laying in drain-pipes remedial measures should be
-tried, especially as the work of draining sadly cuts
-the place about. There may also be a difficulty as to
-the disposal of the outflow. To improve the grass,
-either put the rake heavily over the sward, or employ
-a toothed harrow to drag out as much moss as
-possible. Then spread over the turf a compost,
-previously prepared, of lime mixed with rich soil free
-from weeds, in the proportion of one load of lime to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_441" id="Page_441">[441]</a></span>
-four loads of soil; the addition of Sutton’s lawn
-manure, at the rate of 2 cwt. per acre, will
-stimulate the grass. Eight cartloads of the compost
-should be applied per acre. About a fortnight after
-the dressing has been spread, a sowing of seed will
-quickly fill the ground with young healthy plants,
-and assist in preventing a reappearance of the moss.
-The early part of September should be chosen for
-this work, to give the turf time to recover before the
-next season.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_442" id="Page_442">[442]</a><br /><a name="Page_443" id="Page_443">[443]</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<h2 class="p4">INDEX</h2>
-
-
-<p class="pni">Abel, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Absalom, Mr. C. A., <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Acland-Hood, H., <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Adelaide, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Alcock, Mr. C. H., <a href="#Page_321">321</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. C. W., <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Alexander, <a href="#Page_236">236</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">All England Eleven, the, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Allan, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Alverstone, Lord, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni"><a id="Amateurs_and_professionals" name="Amateurs_and_professionals">Amateurs and professionals</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">definition of the term, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">distinction in cricket almost disappeared, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a comparison made, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the amateur forty years ago, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the amateur to-day, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the professional of old, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the modern professional, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the life of a professional, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">second-rate professionals, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“leagues,” <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">providing livelihoods for amateurs, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">complimentary matches and benefits, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">amateurs’ expenses, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the question in Australia, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Australian system, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">gate money, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">professional and amateur play, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">bowling, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">batting, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">fielding, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the professional wicket-keeper, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">managing a side, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">black professionals, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">America, cricket in, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Philadelphia, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Philadelphian eleven, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">P. F. Warner’s first tour in, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">his second tour, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of K. S. Ranjitsinhji’s eleven, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Mr. B. J. T. Bosanquet’s eleven, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">New York, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Canada, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Anson, Mr. T. A., <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Answorth, J. L., <a href="#Page_390">390</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Appleby, Mr., <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Archer, Mr. A. S., <a href="#Page_352">352</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Armstrong, the Australian, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Askwith, Mr. G. R., <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Attewell, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Auckland, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Australian cricket. <i>See</i> Cricket</p>
-
-<p class="pni">Authentics Cricket Club, the, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Aylward, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2"><i>Badminton Magazine</i>, the, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bails, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bainbridge, Mr. H. W., <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Baldwin, Mr. Lorraine, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Balls, cricket, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Baltimore, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bannerman, A., <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Charles, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Barbados, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bardswell, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Barlow, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Barnes, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Barrett, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Base-ball, <a href="#Page_390">390</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bateman, A. E., <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bates, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bathurst, Sir Francis, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; L. C. U., <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bats, first form of, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">fashion changed, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">limitation of width, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">instruments of defence, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">suitable to young cricketers, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Batting, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">necessity of early practice and good coaching, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</p>
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_444" id="Page_444">[444]</a></span></p><p class="pnii">a good wicket the first essential, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">hints to beginners, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a suitable bat, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">position at the wicket, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">where the weight should fall, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">forward play, <a href="#Page_53">53-58</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the secret of forward play, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">how to play a good length ball, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the off drive, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the “half-cock” stroke, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the forcing forward stroke, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">offensive forward play, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">back play, <a href="#Page_58">58-63</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">moving the right leg, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the golden rule for back play, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a good rule on a sticky wicket, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the hook stroke, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the back glance, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the forward glance, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the leg hit, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the square leg hit, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the pull, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the straight half volley, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">how to drive, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the on-drive, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the three classes of cut, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the forward cut, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the square cut, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the late cut, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the “chop,” <a href="#Page_69">69</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">when to play forward, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">how to play to fast and slow bowling, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">jumping out to hit, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">playing lobs, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the “hitting or long-handle game,” <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">playing on a sticky wicket, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">running, <a href="#Page_73">73-76</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">want of confidence, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">superstitions, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">enthusiasm in cricket, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Beauclerk, Lord Frederick, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Beginners, hints to, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Belcher, Mr. T. H., <a href="#Page_312">312</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Beldham, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">quoted, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bentley, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Berkeley, Mr. G. F. H., <a href="#Page_331">331</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Betting on cricket, influence of, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">single-wicket matches, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“leg-work,” <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">selling matches, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Beldham on betting, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Beverley Club, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bignall, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Birmingham, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bisset, Mr. Murray, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Blackham, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bland, James, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bligh, the Hon. Ivo, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Block-hole, the, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Blore, Mr. E. W., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Blythe, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Board, J. H., <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bonnor, G. J., <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Booth, Mr. Clement, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bosanquet, Mr. B. J. T., <a href="#Page_336">336</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bourne, Mr. A., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bowling, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">advantages of, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">lob bowlers, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">slow bowlers, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Nepean, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">C. M. Wells, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">his fast ball, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">delivery, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">holding the ball, <a href="#Page_90">90-91</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">C. L. Townsend, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Johnny Briggs, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Peel, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Rhodes, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Wainwright, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Trott, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Tyler, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">leg-break bowlers, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">medium bowlers, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">George Lohmann, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">description of Lohmann’s bowling by C. B. Fry, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Jack Hearne, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Attewell and Mead, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Hallam, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Alfred Shaw, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">George Davidson, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Tate, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">F. S. Jackson, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">R. F. Mason, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">fast bowlers&mdash;Tom Richardson, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</p>
-<p class="pniii">Lockwood, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</p>
-<p class="pniii">exhibition of fast bowling at the Oval, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>;</p>
-<p class="pniii">Arthur Mold, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</p>
-<p class="pniii">George Hirst, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</p>
-<p class="pniii">Sam Woods, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</p>
-<p class="pniii">W. M. Bradley, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“lobsters,” <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">great difference between professional and amateur, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bowls, the game of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Boxshall, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Boyle, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a> 231, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bradley, W. M., <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Brain, Mr. J. H., <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; W. H., <a href="#Page_328">328</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Braund, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr., <a href="#Page_27">27</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bray, Mr. E. H., <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Briggs, Johnny, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Britton-Holmes, Everard, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Broadhalfpenny, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Brockwell, W., <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Brown, J. T., <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_445" id="Page_445">[445]</a></span></p><p class="pni">Brown, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bruce, W., <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Buchanan, David, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Buckland, E. H., <a href="#Page_324">324</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. F. M., <a href="#Page_315">315</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Budd, Mr., <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bull, F. G., <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bullingdon Club, the, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bullock, W. H., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Buluwayo, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Burnup, C. J., <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Burton, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bury, W., <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Bush, J. A., <a href="#Page_172">172</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Butler, Mr. S. E., <a href="#Page_312">312</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Caffyn, W., <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Callaway, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cam, the, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cambridge, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cambridgeshire, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Canada, cricket in, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Canterbury Week, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cape Colony, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cape Town, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Carpenter, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Case, Professor, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Case, T. B., <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cazenove, Mr. Arthur, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Charlton, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Chatterton, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Clarke, P. H., <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Clarke, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cliftonians, Old, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Climate, influence of, on cricket, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cobb, M. R., <a href="#Page_392">392</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cobbold, P. W., <a href="#Page_334">334</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cobden, Mr. F. C., <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cobham, Lord, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Coningham, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cooper, W. H., <a href="#Page_236">236</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Coronation Match, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cotterill, G. E., <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cowley Common, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Marsh, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cranfield of Somerset, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Crawford, Frank, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Crawford, Mr., <a href="#Page_203">203</a> note</p>
-
-<p class="pni">Crawford, Mr. V. F. S., <a href="#Page_391">391</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Crawley, Mr. Eustace, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Crawte, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></p>
-
-
-<p class="pni">Cricket, the beginning of, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">origin of name, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">first form of play, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">underhand bowling, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first bat, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">choosing the wicket, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“length” bowling, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">laws in 1774, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match between Kent County and All England in 1847, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">change of fashion in bat, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match between Hambledon Club and All England in 1775, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">number of stumps increased, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">height of stumps and narrowing of wicket, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">distance between the wickets, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">regarding the width of the bat and size of ball, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">invention of gauge, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">laws first committed to writing, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">influence of betting, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a new moral epoch in 1833, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Hambledon Club, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a fire at the M.C.C. Pavilion, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Farnham the cradle of, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">county “boundaries,” <a href="#Page_15">15</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">famous battlefields, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">early matches, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">cricket in the north, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">appearance of Essex and Herts, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first Gents <i>v.</i> Players match in 1798, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">more strict division of counties, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">betting, <a href="#Page_21">21-28</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">single-wicket matches, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cricket, country-house, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the prime of, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">perceptible decrease in the amount of this class of cricket, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">obstacles in the way of, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the task of collecting a team, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">an ideal week of, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the ladies’ cricket match, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">lunches, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Smokers <i>v.</i> Non-Smokers, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the I Zingari Club, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a batch of anecdotes, <a href="#Page_349">349-354</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“military weeks,” <a href="#Page_354">354</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">school tours, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">clubs, <a href="#Page_355">355-359</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">aims of, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; county, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">progress of, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">organisation into a formal competition, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">growth and systematisation, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">gate money, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">increase of cricket, due to the growth of county cricket, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">formation of a county Eleven, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">grounds, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">professional players, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">amateurs, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">relations between professionals and amateurs, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">question of residential qualification, <a href="#Page_149">149-152</a>;</p>
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_446" id="Page_446">[446]</a></span></p><p class="pnii"><i>bona-fide</i> residence, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">early county cricket, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">betting, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">some early matches, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">in the north, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">notes on the early half of the century, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a trio of matches between Sussex and England, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">wides and no-balls, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">arrangement of matches, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">establishment and formation of county clubs, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the All England and United All England Elevens, <a href="#Page_158">158-160</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">classification of counties, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">arrangement of meetings, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">rivalry of clubs, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Challenge Cup offered by the M.C.C., <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">list of the champion counties, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">system of reckoning the order, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">connection between the Marylebone Club and the counties, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">history of the various first-class counties, <a href="#Page_169">169-192</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cricket, earlier Australian, the first English teams to visit Australia, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">first Australian team to visit England, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match against Marylebone, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the 1878 Eleven, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Spofforth, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">his early methods, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">wicket-keepers and fielders, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Lord Harris’s Eleven in 1870, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the second Australian Eleven, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Palmer, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Macdonnell, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match against picked England Eleven, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Alfred Shaw’s Eleven in 1881, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Australian Eleven of 1882, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">decline of form from 1884-1894, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Earl Darnley’s team to Australia in 1882, <a href="#Page_232">232-234</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">difficulties of touring, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the cricket grounds, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Australian Eleven of 1884, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Australian cricket at its highest point, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">an English Eleven under Alfred Shaw visits Australia, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Australian Eleven of 1886, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">signs of deterioration visible, <a href="#Page_240">240-241</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of professionals to Australia under Shaw and Shrewsbury, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">teams under G. F. Vernon and Shrewsbury visit Australia in 1887-88, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Australian Eleven of 1890, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Lord Sheffield’s Eleven to Australia, 1891-92, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Australian Eleven of 1893, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the English representatives, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">influence of the interchange of visits on English cricket, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cricket, English and Australian from 1894-1902, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Mr. Stoddart’s team to Australia, 1894, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match at Adelaide, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match with New South Wales, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">with Queensland, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first test at Sydney, <a href="#Page_256">256-259</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">second test match at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">third test match at Adelaide, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">fourth test match at Sydney, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the final test game at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of the Australians to England in 1896, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">H. Trott as captain, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first test match at Lord’s, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the second test match at Manchester, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the deciding match at the Oval, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">increased pay for professionals, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of A. E. Stoddart’s second team to Australia, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">postponement of the first test at Sydney, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the second test match at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the third test match at Adelaide, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the fourth test match at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the last test, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Darling’s team to England, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first test at Birmingham, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the second test at Lord’s, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the third test at Leeds, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the fourth test at Manchester, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the fifth test at the Oval, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Maclaren’s team to Australia, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first test at Sydney, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the second test at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the third test at Adelaide, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the fourth test at Sydney, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the last match at Melbourne, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Joe Darling’s team in 1902, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the test matches, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the test at Birmingham, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the test match at Lord’s, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">test match at Manchester, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; foreign, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">tours abroad, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the financial question, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the West Indies, <a href="#Page_383">383-389</a>;</p>
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_447" id="Page_447">[447]</a></span></p><p class="pnii">America, <a href="#Page_389">389-393</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Portugal, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">South Africa, <a href="#Page_396">396-408</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">New Zealand, <a href="#Page_409">409-414</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni"><a id="Cricket" name="Cricket">Cricket</a>, University, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the University match, <a href="#Page_297">297-298</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">trial grounds, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Oxford, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Cambridge, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">early history of, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">cricket “families,” <a href="#Page_303">303</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Dark Blues, <a href="#Page_302">302-304</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Light Blues, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the mid-Victorian section of, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a remarkable group of Cambridge players, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“Bill of the Play,” <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the match of 1870, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">triumph of Oxford in 1875, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a close finish, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the ability of the Cambridge Eleven of 1878, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Mr. Edward Lyttelton’s team, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the teams in 1881, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">treatment by the great Australian team of 1882, <a href="#Page_320">320</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Cambridge Past and Present <i>v.</i> Australia, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the ‘Varsity match in 1883, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">comparative falling off of the Universities, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Cambridge victory of 1885, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“the last choice game,” <a href="#Page_324">324</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the difficulty of getting a “blue,” <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Cambridge <i>v.</i> Sussex, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">incidents leading to an alteration in the law of following on, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">new players, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the ‘Varsity match of 1896, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">ebb years between 1896-1902, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a gorgeous piece of cricket, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">undergraduates, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">contemporary Oxford, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Cambridge, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">list of those who have represented England in the test matches at home, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">programme of each season, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">importance of the University match to the funds of the M.C.C., <a href="#Page_340">340</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; village, “Yokels at Cricket,” <a href="#Page_361">361</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">village cricket <i>v.</i> county cricket, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a village match, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">educational value of, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">our Club, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the ground, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the pitch, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the pavilion, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the tea tent, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">officials, members, and subscription, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the committee, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the best village cricketers, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the question of finance, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">details of expenditure, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">country umpires, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the great annual event, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cricketing, early developments in the art of, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">effect of bowling and batting on each other, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">excellence of the Australian game, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">advance in batting due to advance in bowling, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“bias” bowling, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">change in the height of wickets, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">length bowling introduced, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">alteration of the form of bat, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">real beginning of cricket, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">aggressive tactics of early cricketers, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“slogging,” <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">style of batting before 1780, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a new era in the art of batting, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Tom Walker, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“throwing-bowling,” <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Harris’s bowling, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">mode of delivering the ball, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">rising tendency of his balls, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">effect of his bowling on the batting, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">hitting out, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">development of forward defensive play, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cricket Council, the, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Crockford, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cumberbatch, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cunliffe, Mr. F. H. E., <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Cuttell, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Daft, Richard, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Dale, J. W., <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Daniel, A. W. T., <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Darling, J., <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Darnley, Lord, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Davenport, H. R. Bromley, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Davidson, George, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Day, Mr. S. H., <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Demerara, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Denton, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Derbyshire, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Dillon, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Douglas, Mr. R. N., <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; J., <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Downes, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Dowson, Mr. E. M., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Drake, Mr. E. T., <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Druce, Mr. N. F., <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. W. G., <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. W. E., <a href="#Page_76">76</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Duff, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_448" id="Page_448">[448]</a></span></p><p class="pni">Durham, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Emmett, Tom, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Essex, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Eton, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Ramblers, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Evans, Mr. A. H., <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. W. H. B., <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Evershed, S. H., <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Fane, F. L., <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fane, Sir Spencer Ponsonby, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Farnham, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fawcett, E. B., <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fellowes, Mr. Walter, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. Harvey, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fenner, F. P., <a href="#Page_300">300</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fennex, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ferris, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fielding, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">deterioration of, lately, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">importance of, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">how to obtain practice, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">throwing at the wicket, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">ground fielding, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">returning the ball, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">pursuing the ball, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">speed and accuracy in returning the ball, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">running men out, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">anticipating the batsman’s stroke, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">backing up the wicket-keeper and bowler, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">position of hands for catch, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">improvement of wicket-keeping, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">duties of a good keeper, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">position of hands, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the “give,” <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">taking balls on the leg side, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">point, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“cover point,” <a href="#Page_129">129</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">position, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">judging catches, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Gregory at “cover,” <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">duties of “third” man, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the “slips,” <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“mid-off,” <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">“mid-on,” <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">position of short-leg, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">throwing in, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Findlay, Mr. W., <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fisher, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fitzgerald, Mr. R., <a href="#Page_306">306</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Flint, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Flowers, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Foley, Mr. C. P., <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ford, F. G. J., <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; A. F. J., <a href="#Page_318">318</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fortescue, Mr. A. T., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Foster, Mr. H. K., <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. R. E., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Francis, Mr. C. K., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Francis, Mr. H. H., <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Frankish, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Free Foresters Club, the, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Freshmen’s Match, the, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fry, C. B., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Fuller Pilch, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Galloway, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Game, Mr. W. H., <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Garnett, H. G., <a href="#Page_412">412</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Garrett, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gate money, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gay, L. H., <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gentlemen of England team, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gentlemen <i>v.</i> Players, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Georgetown, Demerara, ground at, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Giddy, Mr., <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Giffen, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gloucestershire, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Godalming, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Godfrey, Mr. C. J. M., <a href="#Page_320">320</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Goodman, Clifford, of Barbados, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Goschen, Mr. Charles, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gosling, Mr. R. C., <a href="#Page_325">325</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Graaf Reinet, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Grace, E. M., <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; G. F., <a href="#Page_172">172</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; W. G., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Graham, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Grahamstown, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Green, C. E., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Greene, Mr. A. D., <a href="#Page_316">316</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Greenfield, Mr. F. F. J., <a href="#Page_314">314</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Greenwood, Luke, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gregory, S. E., <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> note, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Greig, J. E., <a href="#Page_174">174</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Grounds, cricket, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">soils on which a pitch cannot be made, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">sandy soil, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>;</p>
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_449" id="Page_449">[449]</a></span></p><p class="pnii">adhesive land, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">drainage, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a slope, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">preparation of the entire area, or only the cricket square, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">reserve plots, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">laying turf or sowing seed, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">cost of turf, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">a sward produced from seeds, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">preparatory work, <a href="#Page_421">421</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">weed seeds in soils, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">enriching the soil, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">surface preparation, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">selection of seeds, <a href="#Page_425">425-428</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">quantity of seed, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">sowing, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">worm casts, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">water and shade, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">bird scares, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">mowing, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">rolling, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">destruction of weeds, <a href="#Page_435">435-436</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">improving cricket grounds, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Grundy, Jemmy, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gully, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Gunn, W., <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Hadow, Mr. Walter, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Haigh, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hall, Harry, of Farnham, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hallam, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Halliwell, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hambledon Club, the, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hammond, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hampshire, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hankey, Mr. Reginald, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hargreave, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Harlequins, the, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Harris, David, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Lord, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Harrison-Ward, Mr. E. E., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Harrow, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Wanderers, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hartley, J. C., <a href="#Page_332">332</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Row, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hartopp, Mr. E. S., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hawke, Lord, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hay, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hayward, Tom, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hearne, J. T., <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Henery, Mr., <a href="#Page_321">321</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Herts, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hewett, Mr. H. T., <a href="#Page_329">329</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hickton, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hill, Mr. A. J. L., <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Clem, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. F. H., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. V. T., <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hirst, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hole, Dean, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Homerton Club, the, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Horan, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hornby, A. N., <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Howell, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Howitt, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hugessen, Mr. C. M. Knatchbull, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Hume, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Humphreys, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Iddeson, Roger, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Incogniti Club, the, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Intercolonial Cup, the, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Iredale, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Isis, the, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Jackson, F. S., <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Jardine, Mr. M. R., <a href="#Page_328">328</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Jarvis, Mr. L. K., <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Jephson, Mr. D. L. A., <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Jessop, G. L., <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Johannesburg, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Johnson, P. R., <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Jones, A. O., <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; E., <a href="#Page_248">248</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; R. T., <a href="#Page_329">329</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; S., <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; 109, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Kaffirs, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kelly, J., <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kemp, Mr. M. C., <a href="#Page_320">320</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kempson, Mr. Mat, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kent, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; <i>v.</i> England, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Festival, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Key, Mr. K. J., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kimberley, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_450" id="Page_450">[450]</a></span></p><p class="pni">King, J. B., <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kingston, Mr. F. W., <a href="#Page_318">318</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">King William’s Town, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kirwan, Mr. J. H., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kitcat, S. A. P., <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Knatchbull, Mr. H. E., <a href="#Page_303">303</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Kortright, C. J., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Lambert, Mr., <a href="#Page_28">28</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lancashire, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lane, C. G., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; of Barbados, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lang, Mr. Andrew, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. T. W., <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Latham, Mr. P. H., <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Laver, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lawrence, C., <a href="#Page_218">218</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leatham, A. E., <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leconfield, the late Lord, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lee, Mr. G. B., <a href="#Page_303">303</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leeds, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">“Legs,” <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leicester, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leigh, Mr. Chandos, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leslie, Mr. C. F. H., <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lester, J. A., <a href="#Page_390">390</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Leveson-Gower, H. D. G., <a href="#Page_365">365</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lewis, Mr. R. P., <a href="#Page_328">328</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lilley, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lillywhite, J., <a href="#Page_218">218</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lincolnshire, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Liverpool, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Llewellyn, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lockwood, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lockyer, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Logan, Mr. J. D., <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lohmann, George, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Longman, Mr. George, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lord’s, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lucas, Mr. A. P., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; R. S., <a href="#Page_383">383</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lyons, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Lyttelton, Mr. Alfred, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. E., <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. G. S., <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Macan, Mr., <a href="#Page_314">314</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">M’Arthy, R. F., <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">M’Cormick, Canon J., <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Macdonald, Dr., <a href="#Page_364">364</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Macdonnell, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">MacGregor, Gregor, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">M’Ilwraith, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">M’Kibbin, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Maclaren, A. C., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">M’Leod, C., <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; R., <a href="#Page_255">255</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Magdalen College School, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Malvernians, the Old, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Manchester, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Marchant, F., <a href="#Page_322">322</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Maritzburg Oval, the, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Marlborough Blues, the, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Married <i>v.</i> Single, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Marshall, H. M., <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Marsham, C. H. B., <a href="#Page_336">336</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; C. J. B., <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Martyn, Mr. H., <a href="#Page_336">336</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mason, J. R., <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Massie, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Matting used for wickets, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">May Week, <a href="#Page_343">343</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">M.C.C., <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mead, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Melbourne, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Middlesex, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Middleton, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mid-off, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mid-on, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Midwinter, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Milligan, the late F. W., <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mitchell, Mr. R. A. H., <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. F., <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mold, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Money, W. B., <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Montreal, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mordaunt, Mr. G. J., <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">More, R. E., <a href="#Page_391">391</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Morley, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Morton, Mr. P. H., <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_451" id="Page_451">[451]</a></span></p><p class="pni">Moses, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Murdoch, W. L., <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mycroft, W., <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Mynn, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Negro, the West Indian, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Nepean, E. A., <a href="#Page_180">180</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Net practice, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Newlands Ground, the, Cape Town, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">New South Wales, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">New South Wales and Victorian Cricket Association, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">New York, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">New Zealand, cricket in, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Lord Hawke’s team to, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">arrival in Auckland, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match against West Coast XXII., <a href="#Page_411">411</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first test match, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the New Zealand Eleven, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">batting, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">bowling, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">New Zealand Cricket Council, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Nicholls, Mr. B. E., <a href="#Page_322">322</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">No-balls, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Noble, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Norfolk, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Norman, Edward, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Philip, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Northamptonshire, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Northumberland, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Nottinghamshire, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Notts <i>v.</i> Kent, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Nyren, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">O’Brien, Sir T. C., <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Odell, W. W., <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Old Trafford Ground, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Onslow, Denzil, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Oporto, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Orford, Mr. L., <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Osbaldeston, Squire, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Oscroft, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ottoway, Mr. C. J., <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Oval, the, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Oxford, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Oxford University Authentics, the, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Oxford University Cricket Club, the, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Page, Mr. H. V., <a href="#Page_322">322</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Palairet, Mr. L. C. H., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; R. C. N., <a href="#Page_331">331</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Palmer, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Parker’s Piece, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Parr, G., <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Patterson, Mr. W. S., <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pauncefote, Mr., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Payne, Mr. A., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pearson, Mr. T. S., <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Peate, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Peel, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Penn, Mr. E. F., <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Perambulators <i>v.</i> Etceteras, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Perkins, Mr. Henry, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; T. N., <a href="#Page_331">331</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Perrin, P., <a href="#Page_171">171</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Philadelphia, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Philipson, H., <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pilkington, C. C., <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pilling, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pinder, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Platts, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Plowden, H. M., <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Plumb, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pooley, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Poore, R. M., <a href="#Page_174">174</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Popping crease, the, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Port Elizabeth, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Porter, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Portugal, cricket in, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">tour of Mr. T. Westray’s Eleven, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">matches against Oporto and Portugal, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the wickets, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Powell, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Powys, Mr. W. N., <a href="#Page_312">312</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pretoria, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pritchard, H. Hesketh, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_452" id="Page_452">[452]</a></span></p><p class="pni">Professionals. <i>See</i> <a href="#Amateurs_and_professionals">Amateurs and Professionals</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Pycroft, Mr., quoted 2, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Quaife, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Queensland, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Quidnuncs, the, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Raikes, G. B., <a href="#Page_332">332</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ramsay, Mr. R. C., <a href="#Page_320">320</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ranjitsinhji, K. S., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rashleigh, Mr. W., <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Read, Maurice, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; W. W., <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Reese, D., New Zealand, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Reid, Sir Robert, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rhodes, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Richardson, H. A., <a href="#Page_309">309</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Tom, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Riddings, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ridley, A. W., <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Robertson-Walker, Mr. J., <a href="#Page_358">358</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rock, Mr. C. W., <a href="#Page_322">322</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rowbotham, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rowe, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Royle, Mr. Vernon, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rugby, <a href="#Page_319">319</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Rutter, Mr. E., <a href="#Page_356">356</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Sackville, Lord John, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">St. John’s Wood, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">St. Vincent, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">San Francisco, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Saunders, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Scattergood, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Scott, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Scotton, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Selby, <a href="#Page_230">230</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Seniors’ Match, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Sewell, Mr. C. O. H., <a href="#Page_390">390</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shacklock, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shalders, of Kimberley, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shaw, Alfred, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shaw, Jemmy, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. E. D., <a href="#Page_320">320</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shine, Mr. E. B., <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shrewsbury, Arthur, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Shuter, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Silwood Park, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Simpson, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Simpson Hayward, J. H., <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Sims, Mr., <a href="#Page_314">314</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Sinclair, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Skeat, Mr., <a href="#Page_1">1</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">“Slips,” <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Small, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Smith, Arthur, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. C. A., <a href="#Page_322">322</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; E., <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; G. O., <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; of Trinidad, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Smokers <i>v.</i> Non-Smokers, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Somerset, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">South Africa, cricket in, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Lord Hawke’s team, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">matting wickets, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">ground, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">length of matting, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">no rolling necessary, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">cricket on matting, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match at Cape Town, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">at King William’s Town, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">matches at Johannesburg, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match against the Transvaal, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">game against South Africa, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">disappointment at Johannesburg, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">two days’ match against Pretoria, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">at Kimberley, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Buluwayo, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">ten days in Rhodesia, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the last matches at Cape Town, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the first English team to visit South Africa, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the team in England, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">wicket-keeping, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">fielding, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">South African Cricket Association, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Spofforth, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Square leg, running away to, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stamford, Lord, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stanning, J., <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_453" id="Page_453">[453]</a></span></p><p class="pni">Steel, A. G., <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Steel, D. Q., <a href="#Page_318">318</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; E. E., <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stephenson, H. H., <a href="#Page_217">217</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stevens, Edward, “Lumpy,” <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stewart, W. A., <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stoddart, A. E., <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Stool Ball, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Storer, W., <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Streatfield, Mr. E. C., <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Strutt, Mr., <a href="#Page_2">2</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Studd, Mr. C. T., <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; G. B., <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; J. E. K., <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Suffolk, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Surrey, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Sussex, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Sydney, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Tabor, Mr. A. S., <a href="#Page_313">313</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tarrant, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tate, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Taylor, A. C., <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; C., <a href="#Page_45">45</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; C. G., <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; T. L., <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tebbut, C. M., <a href="#Page_171">171</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Thompson, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Thornton, C. I., <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Toll, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tonbridge, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Toppin, Mr. C., <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Toronto, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Townsend, Mr. Ch., <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Townshend, Mr., <a href="#Page_311">311</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Traill, Mr. W. F., <a href="#Page_304">304</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Transvaal, the, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Trevor, Captain, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Trinidad, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Trott, A. E., <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; H., <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Trumble, J., <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Trumble, H., <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Trumper, Victor, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tucker, K., of New Zealand, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tufton, Hon. H., <a href="#Page_19">19</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Hon. J., <a href="#Page_19">19</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Turner, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tyldesley, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tylecote, Mr. E. F. S., <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Tyler, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Ulyett, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Umpires, Country, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">United States, cricket in, <a href="#Page_381">381</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">University cricket. <i>See</i> Cricket</p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; matches, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Parks, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Upham, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Uppingham Rovers, the, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Vancouver, <a href="#Page_381">381</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Vernon, G. F., <a href="#Page_242">242</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Village cricket. <i>See</i> <a href="#Cricket">Cricket</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Vine, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Waddy, P. S., <a href="#Page_332">332</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wainwright, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Walker, Harry, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. G. G., <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. J. G., <a href="#Page_321">321</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Tom, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; V. E., <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Walters, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wanderers’ Ground, Johannesburg, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Ward, Mr., quoted, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. Arthur, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Warner, Mr. P. F., <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Warwickshire, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wass, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Webbe, A. J., <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_454" id="Page_454">[454]</a></span></p><p class="pni">Wellington, New Zealand, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wells, Mr. C. M., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">West Indies, cricket in, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of R. S. Lucas’s team, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of Lord Hawke’s team, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">match against Queen’s Park Cricket Club at Trinidad, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">the Intercolonial Cup, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">wickets, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of West Indian team to England, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">visit of last English team, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">general progress of cricket in, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">climate, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">grounds, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Westray, T., <a href="#Page_394">394</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wharton, Major, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Whatman, A. D., <a href="#Page_410">410</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">White of Ryegate, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Whitfield, Mr. Herbert, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Whittom, Dick, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wickets, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wicket-keeping, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wides, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wild, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wills, Mr. T. W., <a href="#Page_306">306</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wilson, C. E. M., <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; E. R., <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Windmill Down, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wisden, quoted, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Woodcock, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Woods of Demerara, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. S. M. J., <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Woof, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Worcestershire, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wordsworth, Mr. Charles, Bishop of St. Andrews, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Works referred to, W. G. Grace’s <i>Cricket</i>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Home Gordon’s <i>Cricket Form at a Glance</i>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Norman’s <i>West Kent Cricket</i>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Ranjitsinhji’s <i>Jubilee Book of Cricket</i>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii"><i>Surrey Cricket</i>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>;</p>
-<p class="pnii">Waghorn’s <i>Cricket Scores</i>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wright, Mr. C. W., <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">&mdash;&mdash; Mr. L. G., <a href="#Page_170">170</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wykehamists, Old, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Wynyard, E. G., <a href="#Page_174">174</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Yardley, W., <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Yonge, Mr. G. E., <a href="#Page_303">303</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Yorkshire, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189-191</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni">Young, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></p>
-
-<p class="pni p2">Zingari, I, Club, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></p>
-
-
-
-<p class="pc4 lmid">THE END</p>
-
-<p class="pc4 reduct"><i>Printed by</i> <span class="smcap">R. &amp; R. Clark, Limited</span>, <i>Edinburgh</i>.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-
-<h2 class="p4">FOOTNOTES:</h2>
-
-<div class="footnotes">
-
-<p class="pfn4"><span class="ln1"><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a></span>
- [<i>Note.</i>&mdash;It is perhaps only the writer’s personal modesty that precludes him
-from giving the Australian an English companion in this special class.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Ed.</span>]</p>
-
-<p class="pfn4"><span class="ln1"><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a></span>
- Since these words were written Bainbridge has resigned and J. F. Byrne has
-filled his place.</p>
-
-<p class="pfn4"><span class="ln1"><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a></span>
- This was done by Leicestershire a few months back when Mr. Crawford
-was made Secretary.</p>
-
-<p class="pfn4"><span class="ln1"><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a></span>
- The examination in bankruptcy of Mr. Gregory, the Australian cricketer,
-in Australia last April, proves that this is an accurate statement.</p>
-
-<p class="pfn4"><span class="ln1"><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a></span>
- Allusion may here be made to the match with the cumbrous title, “Gentlemen
-of England who had not been educated at the Universities <i>v.</i> Gentlemen of
-England who had been educated at the Universities (Past and Present),” which
-was played at the Oval, 15th and 16th June 1874. The Gentlemen “who had
-not” won by an innings and 76 runs, Messrs. W. G. Grace and Appleby bowling
-unchanged in the first University innings, which only amounted to 58. The
-game was never repeated.</p>
-</div>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-<h2 class="p4">TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE:</h2>
-
-<div class="transnote">
-<p class="ptn">&mdash;Obvious print and punctuation errors were corrected.</p>
-</div></div>
-
-</div>
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-<pre>
-
-
-
-
-
-End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Cricket, by Horace Gordon Hutchinson
-
-*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRICKET ***
-
-***** This file should be named 50373-h.htm or 50373-h.zip *****
-This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
- http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/3/7/50373/
-
-Produced by Giovanni Fini, MWS and the Online Distributed
-Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
-produced from images generously made available by The
-Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
-
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
-will be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
-one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
-(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
-permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
-set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
-copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
-protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
-Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
-charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
-do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
-rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
-such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
-research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
-practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
-subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
-redistribution.
-
-
-
-*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
-Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
-http://gutenberg.org/license).
-
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
-all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
-If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
-terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
-entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
-and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
-works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
-or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
-collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
-individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
-located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
-copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
-works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
-are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
-Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
-freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
-this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
-the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
-keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
-Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
-a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
-the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
-before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
-creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
-Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
-the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
-States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
-access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
-whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
-copied or distributed:
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
-almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
-re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
-with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
-from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
-posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
-and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
-or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
-with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
-work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
-through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
-Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
-1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
-terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
-to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
-permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
-word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
-distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
-"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
-posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
-you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
-copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
-request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
-form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
-that
-
-- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
- owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
- has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
- Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
- must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
- prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
- returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
- sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
- address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
- the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
- License. You must require such a user to return or
- destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
- and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
- Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
- money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
- of receipt of the work.
-
-- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
-forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
-both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
-Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
-Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
-collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
-works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
-"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
-corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
-property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
-computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
-your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
-your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
-the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
-refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
-providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
-receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
-is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
-opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
-WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
-WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
-If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
-law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
-interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
-the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
-provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
-with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
-promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
-harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
-that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
-or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
-work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
-Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
-
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
-including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
-because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
-people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
-To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
-and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
-
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
-Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
-http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
-permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
-Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
-throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
-809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
-business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact
-information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
-page at http://pglaf.org
-
-For additional contact information:
- Dr. Gregory B. Newby
- Chief Executive and Director
- gbnewby@pglaf.org
-
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
-SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
-particular state visit http://pglaf.org
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
-To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
-
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
-works.
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
-with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
-Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
-
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
-unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
-keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
-
-
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
-
- http://www.gutenberg.org
-
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-
-
-</pre>
-
-</body>
-</html>
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/b1.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/b1.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1715c3f..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/b1.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/b2.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/b2.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c1f63c4..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/b2.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/b3.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/b3.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9dabec9..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/b3.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/b4.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/b4.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f318330..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/b4.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 773bc70..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/fr.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/fr.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8ff42a5..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/fr.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-007.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-007.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9f63ce4..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-007.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-021.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-021.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f0c6c3d..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-021.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-026.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-026.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 39bcd88..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-026.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-027.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-027.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ecd96c8..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-027.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-029.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-029.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ae5a254..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-029.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-030.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-030.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d26a1a8..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-030.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-035.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-035.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6ddfbf2..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-035.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-047.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-047.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cc98b9f..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-047.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-048.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-048.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dbe9998..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-048.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-051.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-051.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dad777e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-051.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-064.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-064.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7230182..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-064.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-065.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-065.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dad777e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-065.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-072.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-072.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a9e5e88..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-072.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-079.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-079.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ed73bfb..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-079.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-080.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-080.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 827df3d..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-080.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-085.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-085.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cb12d46..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-085.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-086.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-086.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f1ec226..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-086.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-090.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-090.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 523c03a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-090.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-095.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-095.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f9b152f..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-095.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-096.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-096.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 478aa98..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-096.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-110.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-110.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4105ac7..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-110.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-113.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-113.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 71b4238..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-113.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-114.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-114.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 73d38f0..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-114.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-119.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-119.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1d052c2..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-119.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-120.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-120.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 72628ca..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-120.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-123.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-123.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index eee7547..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-123.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-124.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-124.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 68ff249..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-124.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-127.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-127.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f9dd13a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-127.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-128.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-128.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 684c4cf..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-128.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-134.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-134.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9e866e3..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-134.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-135.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-135.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 58072a8..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-135.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-141.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-141.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a152c4d..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-141.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-142.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-142.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bde19f9..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-142.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-151.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-151.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ba9eb19..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-151.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-152.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-152.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 06131bc..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-152.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-159.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-159.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fd03aed..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-159.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-160.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-160.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0d68d49..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-160.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-169.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-169.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8f7e7b5..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-169.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-170.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-170.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0d5a312..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-170.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-175.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-175.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a9ee3bc..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-175.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-184.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-184.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fab8540..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-184.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-185.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-185.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 65f29c0..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-185.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-193.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-193.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5d461c0..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-193.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-194.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-194.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index db65b25..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-194.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-208.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-208.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 08d076c..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-208.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-209.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-209.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4f79993..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-209.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-221.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-221.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a4985d0..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-221.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-227.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-227.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 256955e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-227.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-228.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-228.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 689e6cb..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-228.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-233.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-233.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6d6f375..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-233.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-253.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-253.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2af2074..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-253.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-263.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-263.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 42fd420..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-263.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-273.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-273.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1f9ea84..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-273.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-278.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-278.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 638365b..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-278.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-279.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-279.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 630b7f1..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-279.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-287.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-287.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a8e46bf..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-287.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-288.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-288.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f702e0a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-288.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-297.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-297.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 87c777c..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-297.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-298.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-298.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 169ad16..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-298.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-305.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-305.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0caddbd..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-305.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-309.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-309.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3bf40fc..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-309.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-315.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-315.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 65caed4..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-315.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-323.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-323.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b08ce4a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-323.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-333.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-333.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6cfefd7..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-333.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-347.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-347.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d78399a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-347.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-351.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-351.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 92b028b..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-351.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-361.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-361.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 30d983b..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-361.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-375.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-375.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 49614c3..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-375.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-376.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-376.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2cde65f..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-376.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-400.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-400.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5de1712..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-400.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-403.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-403.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 09554a5..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-403.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-404.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-404.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c02fb95..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-404.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-411.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-411.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 92b3784..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-411.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-412.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-412.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 66ca23a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-412.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-429.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-429.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1fb2841..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-429.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-439.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-439.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 670cc92..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-439.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-454.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-454.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 68c4529..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-454.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-457.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-457.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 90bfd71..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-457.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-467.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-467.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3ebb705..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-467.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-478.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-478.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9e3cf23..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-478.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-479.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-479.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 88559cb..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-479.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-489.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-489.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ebe36c5..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-489.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-490.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-490.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5bdc20e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-490.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-495.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-495.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1c0bf91..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-495.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-496.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-496.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9805f88..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-496.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-504.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-504.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1ea16ff..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-504.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-505.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-505.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c43212d..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-505.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-511.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-511.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c76e5f8..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-511.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-519.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-519.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0af5232..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-519.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-524.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-524.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b612c1f..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-524.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-527.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-527.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 31c7a7a..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-527.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-533.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-533.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 75eb78d..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-533.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-541.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-541.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 720df58..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-541.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-548.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-548.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7a75c6e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-548.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-549.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-549.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0f6488c..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-549.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-567.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-567.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a03688..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-567.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/ill-568.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/ill-568.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ab0766e..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/ill-568.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/50373-h/images/title.jpg b/old/50373-h/images/title.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b2ac094..0000000
--- a/old/50373-h/images/title.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ