CRICKET.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 292, 8 December 1900, Page 4 (Supplement)

CRICKET.

Lovely weather prevailed on Saturday, when, after a lapse of two weeks, the Cup matches were resumed. The wickets were fast, and those on the Domain were at times fiery. The wickets on the Shore ground were perfect, all in favour of the batsmen, as the Shore bowlers found to their cost. Tlie Auckland men are loud in

their praises of the wicket, which had undoubtedly a good deal to do with their big score.

The Auckland total of 443 for four wickets against North Shore, and MacCormick's -innings of 152 not out, have, of course, been the topic in cricket circles during* the past week. Owing to the absence of authentic records in local cricket, it is impossible to say, definitely, whether the performance is a record one, but certainly no one seems to remember its equal. Play was started at half-past two, or, to be exact, twenty-two minutes past, two, and the stumps were drawn at half-past six, so that 4-ia runs were scored in some four hours, that is, at the rate of 110 runs an hour, which is very fast. One must admit at the outset that the Shore bowling was not very formidable, especially on such a heartbreaking wicket, but, that must not be allowed to depreciate to any great extent the work of the Aucklanders. They batted splendidly, and with tine confidence, and they thoroughly deserved their runs. MacCormick's display was, of course, the feature'of the match. For a player to score 152 not out in his second senior match is certainly unusual. MacCormick began his cricket at the Grammar School, and played for the School in the third grade in the season 1898-99. Last year lie was a member of the victorious Auckland Second Eleven, and this year lie was promoted to the seniors, opening the season with a well played 45 against Gordon. His score on Saturday occupied a little under three hours, and was pretty well faultless. At 109 he gave ii hard chance in the slips, which was probably the result of the North Shore men's advice to him "to shake her up." The Shore fieldsmen were" getting a little bit tired, and thought that the batsmen might liven things up a little more. After this, however, MacCormick did not follow their advice. His runs were mostly got by cuts and leg strokes. The way he got the ball away between the slips was a treat. His detailed score reads thus: 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 4, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 4, 1, ,'J, .1, 4, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, a, 1, 2, 2, 1, I, 1, 2, 2, i, 3, 2, a, i, 2, i, 4, i, i, i, j, 2, i,;:, a, 2, 4, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, a, 4, 1, 1, j, a, 2, 4, 1, 4, I, l, i, 4, i, i, i, a, i, i, 2, 2, 4, a, i, i.

Neill's score of 100 was the second century he has made in Cup cricket, though he has got into the nineties more than once. It was got in his best style, his play being somewhat more vigorous than usual. He got off one tremendous hit, probably the biggest he has ever made, clean out of the ground on to the road. Hob appeared to be thoroughly at home to the bowling, and only made one false stroke. His score reads, 1, 1. 4, 1, a, 4, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 4, 2, 2, 4, 1, 2, 1, I, ?,, 2, 1, a, 4, 4, 1, 1, 1, 4, 4, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 4, 1, 2, 1, 2, 4, i, i, 4, a, l.

The batting of Nicholson and Quentery was overshadowed somewhat \>y that of MacCormick and Neill, but both their displays were admirable. They went in first, and had to face . the best of the bowling*, and were not separated until 126 was totalled, and then the separation was effected by a rim out. It is extremely likely that a record for a first wicket would have been established if this had not happened, as both had the bowling under control. After Nicholson left, Quentery, who appeared to feet that he was to be blamed for the incident, grew careless, and soon left. Ilemus' 34 was another indication of promise on the part of this young batsman.

The Shore bowling- ,was straight enough, but it had little in it. Of course, the perfect wicket was a great handicap to the bowlers. McNeill was the best, though he lacked accuracy.

The United-Gordon match was disappointing. Everyone thought United Avould at least reach 200 on the wicket provided, and their score of Mt) must be classed as medicore. Marshall, with the men failing at the other end, played the game and hit vigorously, but he was decidedly lucky. Hawkins, who, in his pilgrimage round the Auckland clubs, has returned to his old love, was second scorer with 21. "Dug" Hay lost his wicket in a. peculiar way. He and his brother take guard iii different places, "Dug" taking his on the crease, and mistaking his brother's block-hole for his own, on playing* back, he hit his wicket, Williams was in good form with the ball, and bowled unchanged throughout.

Gordon did not do any better when It came to their turn to bat. Kallender could do little more than nearly kill half a dozen people near the pavilion with one of his terrific drives, and Ansenne seemed to have an unusually strong disinclination to play forward.

I actually saw him play back to a full-pitched ball on the off. Gillies showed nice, form for 10, nnd eventually succumbed to one of Hawkins' best, while Luck and Seccombe made a serviceable stand. Of the United bowlers, Stemson seemed to have more pace than usual. Probably the pitch helped him; some of his balls bumped unpleasantly at times. In the Parnell-Ponsonby contest, Parnell again showed their batting strength by putting up the respectable total of 262, Elliott was top with G4, and at one time looked set for a century. It was a good, solid effort in his best style. Ohlson got 45, Mills 36, and Woods 30, but the most interesting display was that of Oliffe, who got 48. Oliffe has been known favourably in connection with Giles' College team for some time, but the form he showed on Saturday surprised most people. He played the bowling- -with confidence, and anything off the wicket was "pasted." On the leg side he was fatal, and time after time the ball travelled to the boundary, while his cutting was clean and well timed. With a little more driving power he should be a very formidable bat. This was Oliffe's first appearance in senior cricket.

Ah interesting match was played a littlo while ago between the second aud third (A) Auckland Club elevens. The Third got 129, thanks mainly to Graham (45), who I am sure will be found in the seniors before long. The Seconds lost wickets very fast, but thanks to Beale (48 not out), and Cossey (57 not out), the score was 131 for G wickets when time was called.

The bowling of Prankish and Pearce is, says the "N.Z. Cyclist," a source of gratification, in view of the near approach of representative matches. The former never bowled better than on Saturday—quite up to his old form of two seasons ago. Pearce showed that, one year's absence from play has not lessened his skill.

Says the Sydney "Referee": In their prime Turner and Ferris were greater than any Australian bowler of the present day, and far greater on wickets that helped the bowler. For about five years the pair proved the most destructive combination of bowlers, perhaps, tlie world has ever known. They had not the grand array of highclass bats to back them up that Australian bowlers now have, and the fielding was not quite so good. They came to the front at a period when Australian batting was at its worst; most of the old champions were going off, and few younger ones of high ability coming on. Besides, at that time some of the lights of Australian, cricket were not partial to a trip to England—notably IT. Moses and G. Gil.'en. Yet, they beat England tit Lord's in |188.. In that famous match Ferris made 34 runs for once out, more runs than'any other man on either side made, with the exception of W. G. Grace, who also made.34; but W.G. was twice out, and twice a victim to Ferris. The left-hander, beside- getting runs, also captured flight wicket- for 45 runs. As showing how cricket in England and Australia has changed in the last ten years, Australia's one chance of beating England ut Lord's or the Oval then rested in a bad wicket, with Turner and Ferris to perform wonders. Now England's best chance of beating Australia lies in a bad wicket. Australia has for ten years needed a left-handed bowler to take the place of Ferris, who may be said to have severed his connection with Australian cricket after 1890.