CRICKET

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1514, 7 March 1901, Page 32

CRICKET

(BY THE “HITTXTE.”) Last Saturday’s games provided some fair exhibitions of batting and bowling skill. Clarke’s century was a fine display of aggressive batsmanship, and the manner in which he and Midlane slogged the ball about was a fine object-les-son to the rank and file of senior players who regularly kill time at the wickets and murder interest on the outskirts. A good performance at a critical time was that of Stephenson and. < Bead at the fag end of the Midland's second innings. The score stood at a trifle over 90 for nine wickets .when they got together, and they quickly ran the total up to over 130, at which total stumps were drawn for the day. Ashbolt was again in good form with the leather, and took G wickets for thirty-nine runs. Clarke secured a similar number of wickets for even fewer runs, but against that it must be said that the calibre of the batsmen opposed to him was not equal to that of the Midland team. The Midland, team’s batting as a whole was disappointing. Williams was over-cautious; and as for Weybourne, he pottered at the wickets for over half an hour for five runs. Ilcldsworth hit hard, but not often; Hickson gave a fair exhibition.

In the Old Boys innings the only meritorious feature was the stand made by Douglas and Blacklock. Douglas laid on the wood nicely and carried his bat out; and the score of Blacklock was marked by several nice strokes.

One bad feature of Wellington cricket this season has been the consistent scoring of that unpopular nonentity—extras. Hardly an innings is played in which he fails to strike double figures, and in some his score* runs up to close on 30 runs. Which reminds me that in the Old Bays’ -Phoenix match C. P. Blacklock has kept down the extras fairly well. Blacklock has been showing good form behind the sticks of late, and he is likely to develop into a really first-class wic-ket-keeper. McKibbin, the one-time tricky and deadly bowler of the Australian Eleven, seems to be regaining a little of his oldtime form. Describing a match played at Adelaide recently, the correspondent of the “Referee” says :—“Port Adelaide beat West Torrens rather unexpectedly, owing to the deadly bowling of McKibbin. On the first day Ports made 120, and West Torrens had three wickets down for 66. The remaining seven wickets made 41, and the Ports won by 13 runs. MoKibbin got seven wickets for 43.” Last season Mac was “under a cloud,” as far as bowling was concerned. He was playing in club cricket in Bathurst. N.S.W., and had to “run hard” for his place in the team, once or twice. “The Hittite” knows this, for he was there.

The visit of an English cricket team to Australia, which was postponed last year on account of the war, is likely to eventuate in September next. A writer in the London “Sportsman,” writing on the subject, hints that matters have been definitely arranged, but adds: “It will be useless making the trip unless the M.0.C., who are to send out the combination under their patronage, can get together a representative team —I will not say actually the best thirteen or fourteen men. The strain will be a great one with a visit from Australia to follow in 1902, and the only thing will be for the programme in the colonies to include as few minor fixtures as possible. General satisfaction will be felt if Lord Hawke consents to go as captain, but this would not in any way interfere with! the position of Mr A. C. Maclaren, who* would probably take charge of the team, in the Test engagements. I was told the other day by someone who follows coursing that “Capt. Mann” had stated that he pro-

bably would not be coursing next winter, as he would be abroad. This hints at the visit in question, though it must not be forgotten that his wife is an Australian lady.” The remarks of the old English cricketer, James Lillywhite, on the subject of throwing, as contributed to a London paper, make interesting reading. He says:—“Having now for nearly forty years played or stood umpire in firstclass cricket, playing twenty years for Sussex without missing a single match, and the latter part of the time standing umpire—-I know no reason why lam not standing in 1901, as my wish was to do so.

“Throwing, or what people choose to call it, was prevalent twenty, thirty, or forty years ago as now, but what have the suspects ever done to live in cricket history compared with such men as Wootton, Grundy, Jackson, Tarrant, Caffin, Griffith, Freeman, etc., of the sixties, A. Shaw, J. C. Shaw, Ulyett, the Mclntyres, and myself in the latter decade, followed by the greatest bowler of all time, in my opinion, F. B. Spofforth, Lehmann (almost his equal), Palmer, Boyle, Peel, Peate, down to the present dav, when we have such men as the two Yorkshire cracks, Briggs, Trott, Jack Hearae, etc,, whose deliveries have been, and are, above suspicion. We look ’in vain for suspects to compare with these men.

‘‘Throwing, however, is illegal, and I trust it ever will be; and therefore should be stopped; but first prove the throw. In three cases out of four suspected it is a fair ball, with only a peculiarity of action in delivery—some little curl of the wrist, or some undefinable motion hardly to be described. But let the umpire be as clever as he likes, he could in justice no-ball this for throwing, the very action of the ball from the pitch being all against that theory. A throw must always break back sharply. Pick out the throwers, and no-bail them, but prove they throw first. If throwing became legal we should have our county officials searching the towns and villages during the winter for crack throwers. They would probably want a. dozen, and even then in. a dry season run short by August. A thrower’s career would, indeed, be a short one, limited to a single season in all likelihood; and what mischief he •might do by causing some of our cracks batsmen to stand down, through severe injury, half a season. “I once heard Pooley accuse; Southerton of being the biggest thrower in England, at a time when no one else could detect the slightest sign of it. How-

ever, later in life* his delivery became open to suspicion, the disguise not being maintained, and I feel convinced that the wicket-keeper is the best man to detect a, throw, and the batsman next. “Drawn games are unavoidable as things now stand. The hours of play are quite sufficient for the players to go on continuously for six days a week for several months and not get stale, particularly the bowlers. For the last thirty years legislation has always favoured batsmen. First"we got the great white -screens behind the howler’s arm ; then followed the white, coats for the umpires, also six balls: to the over; but the oliief cause of drawn games is the magnificent wickets now prepared on almost all cur county grounds. Let some genius come forward for once, and find something to assist the long-suffer-ing bowler.” Apropos of the “throwing” habit, a discussion as to the evil is taking place in Sydney and Melbourne. The latest theory as to the reason- of its existence Is that Bulli soil wickets cause it! Says a writer on the “Beferee” :—“Several prominent Sydney cricketers—one an old International and Inter-State play-, er—assure me .that* the Bulli soil is responsible for the prevalence of the throwing evil in Sydney. Owing to the absence of clay foundations it is extremely difficult for the bowler to make the ball rise bail high. The natural result is that the wickets are so* easy for batsmen that, in order to get an extra amount of whip, spin, and break, the* howler brings all his wrist-play into action.” Several of the cracks failed! to shine in this season’s Sheffield Shield matches. Howell only took two* wickets, at a cost of 74 runs each. Giffen, in his six innings, scored but 65 runs, and his four wickets each cost 123.5 runs. Jones captured three* wickets at an average of 36.

A unique cricket match was played at Adelong recently, the contesting teams being Adelong Tradesmen v. an eleven surnamed Whiting. The scorer and umpire were also similarly named, and all are residents of Sharp’s Creek. Scores : Adelong Tradesmen, 76; Whitings, SO (John Whiting 28). Adelong, second innings, 90 (Moon 24, Budd 18). The match was decided on the first innings in favour of Whitings. Says “Slip” in the “Otago Witness’’: “A rather curious incident occurred in the course of the play at Carisbrook on Saturday. Mills swept a. ball from Ferguson to leg with such force as to cause, the impression that it would easily reach the boundary, which is the grass on the outer side of the track. The ball lost its impetus, however, on the slope of the track and stopped dead about a foot from, the edge. The batsmen—Ptearleiss being} associated with Mills—realised the situation more quickly than the fieldsman, and commenced to run for dear life. Thereupon Johnston, who was the nearest fieldman, had not ruin after the hall, expecting it to

make the boundary, and he tore after it with ail speed, and disregarding the shouts of some of his comrades to ‘‘kick it to the boundary,” returned it in time to prevent the batsman from getting more than five runs for the stroke —one more than he would have got had the ball found the boundary.”