FORTY YEARS OF CRICKET.

Press, Volume XLVIL, Issue 7732, 11 December 1890, Page 2

FORTY YEARS OF CRICKET.

8T..W..G. Geack. No* XXX.—Ckicket in mr Manhood. '-'' ' '"1887.'' . Tbe old saying that '* It is a long lane that has no turning " was strikingly verified by Surrey County in 1887. After a period of twenty-three years, the committee of that County Club could breathe more freely, and realised that their efforts had been attended with,success. Surrey was again at the top, and a very fine record it had to show, having beaten Notts twice, Yorkshire twice, Derbyshire twice, and Lancashire, Middlesex, Sent and Sussex once each. The eleven was a strong one, including such players as Messrs J. Shuter, W. W. Read, Roller and Key, and Lohraann, M. Read, Abel/Beaumont, Bowley, Jones and Wood. The batting was strong enough, and could compare favourably with that of any other county; but they Were quite- as strong in bowling. Lohmann was worth playing for his batting and fielding alone; hut his bowling undoubtedly was then, as now, the back- : boneotthe team. They were very successful in wicket-keeping also. I cannot remember any county who has been so fortunate with their wicket-keepers during the last twenty-five years as Surrey. Lockyer created a reputation second to none; Pooley was a worthy successor, and Wood lias proved that he might be classed in the same company. Lancashire was second on the list, and owed its position to its bowMng also. Watson, Briggs and Barlow had few equals as all-round players; and Mr Hornby had lost none of his skill as a batsman, or enthusiasm and Judgment as a leader. Notts was compelled to take third place —a position' lower than it had occupied for many years. Shrewsbury in batting had a fine average for it, having played 18 completed innings f0r1,388 runs; average, 77.2: and he was well supported by Gunn and Barnes. His average, with the exception of my own in 1874 and 1876, when I played 7 and 11 completed innings for averages of 84 and 80, is, I believe, far in advance of any other player's average for his county since county cricket was played. Against Middlesex at Nottingham on the 15th and 16th August, he scored 287 in* an innings, made without a chance, and which occupied him ten hours and a quarter. Before the season was over, he scored over the century on six other -occasions for his county; and that year, ; while he did hot play in so many matches, as he did In some years, was the Most; successful in which be had yet played. His displaymfirst-class matches.was a fine one indeed, and put in the shade all. professional performances: 21 completed innings, 1,653 runs; average, 78.15. The only batfcinpc displayed to be classed with it is my own in 1871, when I played—-

85completed innings. 2729 runs; averTfiie result olCoonty Matches were :

At a largely attended meeting of County Delegates, held as Lord's on July 12th, Lord Harris in the chair, it was moved and unanimously carried: «- ** * \ L—" That a County Cricket Council he.j formed, ~.,.?" " a—* 4 That the Council consist pt ,one representative .each, from the counties of jJ6Ste 4 i Yorkshire. Surrey, Kent, Lancaahh*e,Bdssea\ Middlesex, Dereyen{!*a,£Ksex, Warwickshire, Norfolk, Leicestershire, -Somersetshlre, Northamptonshire, Hampshire, Durham,. Hertfordshire, and Cheshire. ■ 3.*-'" That it shall be competent for the Council to alter or amend the rules Of County Cricket Qualification. ~* . 4?--* ? That \npon- all 'questions- raised under the rules of County Cricket Qualification the Committee of the M.C.C. shall adjudicate."' That' was undoubtedly a step in the right direction: for the birth ,• and residential qualifications had agitated the mindsaf County Club Committees for many years. Aa long ago as 1868, when it was no unusual tiling for a player to represent two counties in the same season, the Notts: Committee ottered a protest against it to Ahifle&ect: .-..-,.. -;..-:-.- . r- ~; ? ?; ibhe impression that County. Cricket, to be thoroughly appreciated by thepnblic, a return ought to be made as near as may be to the manner in which those centers were formerly conducted, but birth enabled any player, i whether gentleman or profesaional, to take part therein; and that, consequently, it he an Instruction to the Committee, in the «ilaeaaa of oar futssra matches, to. give I preference to those counties who adopt < *aßsosdl7, that so long as the title to in scant j matchesisby rosideßCfi aa well, j asblrth, same may be acquiesced iv. by ' the Committee, pa the understanding that no avoh piayer shall play in any respect of each such qualification daring the season. "Lastly, thatit .ben. further Instiruetlo'n I to the they, endeavour to prevail upon au the counties who do.not at present do so, to adopt'the principle; of the last resolution. It is believed that j Kent, Sussex, Yorkshire,. Cambridgeshire :' *Pob&h6dby peehaarrassements with the wsthor. AS reserved, I?

and Notts, at the present time, play only those who are county-born: and it is thought pther counties wotild follow in their wake if fche subject wese properly .Introduced to tbeSr notice, as' tending to promote a real and appreciable contest eountT and county. 1, , Soarreasra later the Surrey Committee raised the question also; and afc a meeting of the representatives of the leading counties In December, 1372, a resolution was passed: ** That no slayer, either amateur or professional, play for i&oro ttuut one county during the season; but that be shall be free to choose at the beginning of (he eesaon whether he shall play under the birth or residential qualification." A copy of the resolution was sent to the i M.C.C.,' who weighed it carefully, and eventually the following rules were passed at * meeting of County representatives held in the Surrey County Pavilion at the Oval, on the 9th June, 1873, and which were approved of at a meeting of the I M.C.C. held in the Pavilion at Lords on the let of July of the same year. Rule L—"That no cricketer, whether amateur or professional shall play for more than one county during the same season.

2.7—HEvery cricketer born in one county and residing in another shall be free to choose at the beginning of each season for '-which of those counties he will play, and shall, during that season, play for that county only. , 3.—" A cricketer shall be qualified to play for any county in which he is residing and has resided for the previous two years, or a cricketer may elect to play for the county in which his family home is, aolong.as it remains open to him aa an occasional residence."

4.—" That should any question arise as to the residential qualification, the tame shall be left to the decision of the Marylebonedub."

■ A farther dlscusion of those rales arose at a meetingof County Secretaries held ata Lord's in December, 1881, when Lord Harris mtfved, " That the Committee of the M.C.O. be requested to consider whether the two years' residential qualification might not Dβ safely reduced to one year." But the motion was rejected by 14 votes to 3, and the roles which I have given are the rules which govern the quauflcatione of county players to-day. Individual batting performances were as brilliant as la any previous year, and we have to go far to find as good a record aa the following: Over SOO runs in an innings, in first-class matches, was exceeded six times; twice by W. W. Bead, and once each by K. J. "Key; A. J. Webbe, Shrewsbury, and Gunn. Over 100 runs in an innings, in first-class matches, was scored 123 times: six times by Shrewsbury, six times by myself (twice in one match), and more than once by two or three others. My two centuriea In one match were made against Kent, at Clifton, on the 25th, 26th, 27th August, and it was the second time I had done it in first-class cricket. The Players won both matches very easily against the Gentlemen: the first, at Lord's, by an innings and 123 runs; the second, at the Oval, t»y an innings and Iβ runs. Shrewsbury, in the first match, batted excellently for . Ill; but it was owing to the fine all-round play of the team that they did so well, and asserted their undoubted superiority. The successful bowlers were also successful with the bat, and their fielding was quite as brilliant as that of the Gentlemen. Without doubt it was the strongest all-round team that, had ever represented them. The bowling of . the Gentlemen was their weak spot, and their eleven was over-matched in both contests.

ii j i? t I I I: Surrey ;,'.». „ ie 12 2 2 Lancashire.. „ .. 14 10 1 3 Nottinghamshire .. .. 14 8 3 3 Middle-ax.. « ' .. 1» A 4 2 Yorkshire.. .. ~ ie ♦ -f 3 Sussex .. M ... 12 2 2 ;8 K«nt .. n .. 14 1 5 18 Gloneestershlre -, - ** " T '"'""*'""-" 9 Derbyehre .. .* « ,? Of 6

Batting in First-class Matches in 1897, in not In not tless than Twenty Innings. S , ;,. : ; J ? at *• Sa f 4 - 5 i 1 j ? Shrewsbury .. ...21 1653 26T 78.16 W. G. Grace. Esq. ..38 2062 183* 64.10 A. X Webbe, Esq. » 28 1244 243* 47.22 W. W. Read.-Esq. -.34 1615 274 47.17 K. J. Key, Esq. ... 39 1684 281 43.7 Hall .. ~ - 32 1240 f60 38.24 Ulyett.. .. - 39-14W 199* 38.5 Giinn .. ~ .. 27 958 205* 35.13 J. Kcoles, Esq. ..20 677 113 33.17 Barnes .. .. 29 957 160 33 J. Shuter, Esq. .. 27 871 111 32.7 Quaife.. .. - 29 826 111 81.27 Loe ...-■■ .. -..' 20 591 185 29.11 A. N. Hornby, Esq. „ 25 717 105 88.17 A. E. Stoddart, Esq. _ 88 799 161 28.15 Briggs,. .. 29 819 68 23.7 W. Rashleigb, Esq. .. 29 816 108 28.4 F. Marohaut, Esq. ..22 588 78 2a 14 F.Hearne „ ' ~ 38 921 144 85.21 Lohmann ---.,'- .. 33' 843 315 25.18 G. G. Hoarne .. ..28 714 91 25.14 Peelv '..'■-■ .. .. 33 835 91 85.19 Bates .. „ 40 995 103 24.36 The list comprises 13 professionals and 10 gentlemen. Bowling in First-class Matches In 1887. g -S § ■-<■■■& s? ,?:,o_ S <± Attewell« -. 1330.1 810 1238 89 13.81 Watson".." ..1532.2 937 1483 100 14.82 Lohmann .. 1634.2 737 2-104 154 15.94 Beaumont .. 684.1 326 1072 64, 16.48 Flowers.. .. 885 422 1171 68 17.15 Peel " .. ..' 1097 507 1472 85 17.27 Brfcrgs -..'■■ .. 1592.1 831 8018 114 17.80 E. ATrTeflean. Esq. 478.2 124 1091 60 18.U Burton .. .. 722.2 334 1004 55 18.14 Preston .. .. 533.2 233 974 62 18.38 Barlow .. .. 727 374 994 53 18.40 Wottou .. .. 1373.1 603 1892 100 18.92 Bai-nca .. .. 1103.3 518 1712 90 19.3 Emmet*.. ..1030 633 1403 73 19.16 Bowley' .. 957.3 469 1373 67 20.33 W. G. Grace, Esq. 1273.2 525 2078 97 21.41 The list comprises 14 professionals and 2 gentlemen.