NOTES BY SLIP.

Otago Witness, Issue 2059, 10 August 1893, Page 32

NOTES BY SLIP.

The Australians.clearj?d£36s by Iheir second match against, Yorkshire, and about; a similar, sum by their first. ope. : -\ - * " ,"A • . ' Mr Moorehou ,e, within recent, years a representative both of. Canterbury and. Wellington, did some good- scoring at Home last season, and apparently be\is in a' 'run-getting vein this.' summer as. well, for . I notice that playing on June 3 for his club (MeifcoD) against Epsom he, claimed 101 (not Out) in a score of 234 for' six wickets. -"-•.', ■ ' . A. B. Stoddarfr, G. M'Gregor, P. J. T. Henery, C. P.'Foley, and A. / J. Webbe were all from some unexplained reason absent from the Middlesex team iwhichmet the Australians. ' Tiie defeat sustained by .the Australians last week at the hands- of Surrey (by whom their, were also defeated easier in their tour) .waif the first they have suffered since their disastrous - rout by tbe Eoglish Elespn on June 28. At that time, the. Cornstalks appeared tp have, f in a sense, fallen to pitces, but after nearly sacrificing the Ndrth'pf>Eog)and, match,' tbey^bave „, since dtfeatedjn succession Derbyshire Leices- . ' terehire, Yorksm^e',- Sussex, Somersetshire, and Middlesex, with ; ; V creditable draw .,w,ith ; j All England thfown'in. At the time, the team was. selected I expLre&ed.tShe fear tbab it/was tin- " doubtedly weak" in bowling, while "..as for -its batting" I wrote," I do not know that it could be improved much;" Of the team'gerierally^l offered the opinion' that it |was .•,' thebeati ;yet chosen with ihe'exception of the 1882 team,, which was in all respects the most representative that has left the shores of Australia.?' In - Cricket of June'ls,' the Rev. R. T. Holmes says t ' that •• the Australians are' very strong^in bat- ■ ting, .but comparatively harmless 'with ,'the ball." 4> " ' : ■ ' ".!'"'-", , The truth o£ these remarks has been pome - out by the results-,of the matches played in .the month of July, itfwhicb,' except on wet wickets, teams of moderate batting 'ability .-liave,, been able to complle?godd scores, again&t- the v Cornstalks, whosa batting performances have,", how- , ever, been wondefully fine. ' Their colossal score last week, against • the Universities", ■of course dwarfs^everything ofee they have^done, and would cf itself be sufficient to makejtheir l touc noteworthy.- As hasbeenremarked'byan influential London journal, it has fairly set the • seal upon tho fame'of "the' team. . . ln spite of ' the manifest mediocrity of the bowling opposed to them, it was'a unique performance that 'no fewer than eight members cf a cricketing eleven should score more than 50, runs apiece, three of them popping the century, in a', single innings. The total of. the .innings is of course a record fpr au-^Australian 'team in England— the highest scbre^previously recorded was 643 • made by the fyjam-ot 1882 against Sussex,^ this including W. I?.' Murdoch's contribution ; of 286 . (notou}.), which rß'the.high,'eßt;ndiviilual score made by au'.Adstralian in the old country— but it is alsp" the" largest total. tverrecorded'iira first-class match.; ' „,,.,• \- [J , - Brior-to la6t' I »eek, the highest aggregate in'a first-class ma(;ch was 803, niade by.the Smokers in the celebrate^ match with the Non-Smokers atrMelbourne'in'MiTch 1877j the next best score being the total>6f. 775 (the highest recorded in intercolonial .contests), made by New South Wales agaiDsfe. Victoria in' 1882. < In" minor matches there have, of course, been bigger scores made. The highest authenticated total in any match is the score of 920 made by the Orleans Club against 'Bidding Greon in 1882. Ascore of 1238 runs is said to have been made at Sydney in l&7sin a match between tbe Ulster and Macquarie'Clubs — and I fanoy thafran'Australian paper- recently published what purported ' to be, the individual contributions to that total — bnt the reebnjp has not been accepted. Then, in 1890, in Qa"M r Colony a total of 858 was made by Harrifmiih/and District'in a match' against Newcastle -arid'/ District, 'but no other scores have heen registered exceeding that' made last week by the eighth Australian 'Eleven/ Tbe colonial record in a minor match was established last ryear by jtie Melbourne Club, who scored 828 against Effienden, and, other colossal figures are' the 814' compiled by Hampstea d against the ■ Stoics'in 1886/*(that being ihe match in which that celebrated^ player, A. E. Stoddait,' by ■ scoring- 485 iylns off his own bat, created a recorcLfor an." individual winnings) and, the 745 (for only fduif;'wi'ckets) made by the West of Scotland a'gainst'Priory Park in 1885. ■' ' " Itiswortby,of remark that up to the present point in theirjKfw: no f ewisr than eight members of the Australian team J&ve subscribed more than 100 ransom a" Bingle^inningp, .these being G. Giffen, v ßajpi(erman t Trott, Graham, Lyons, Gregory, Bruise,"- and v Trimble, of whom the four flrst-nam|d'playerß have each achieved tb*e feat on two Bjfoa&ipns;' sif that, whatever the bowling averages' may be— and the weakness of the attack wa^strikingly demonstrated on Friday last when. the/Essex county team were able to score 215~rups^-it seems highly probable that at the conclusion of the tour a decidedly , creditable set!of- batting averages, will, be.pre-^-sented#> Jaryi'a 1 maybs, and almost certainly willbe ( an tlception to this .rule, but on the other hand' hp'rbas,- done, good eervice- at the wickets in several matohe| when the state of Blac.khtfrffs'ha'ncls has necessitated the captain's standing out. -When I add that, in the 1882 tour, the century was topped by not more than five of the team— Murdpch, Horan," Masne, Bannerman, and Bonnor.rj-the batting strength -. of the present combination, who have not' met - a larger- proportion of weak, teams than the

Cornstalks encountered eleven'years ago, will be appreciated. * ','•■,. ■ Notwithstanding that they had to go in against the huge total of 674 made by Notts, the Sussex team on June 10' made a very creditable draw of their match with the lace county.' The honour's in achieving such a result belonged largely to W. 1 L^Murdoch, who played admirable cricktt. In their first innings, Sussex made 221 (W. L. Murdoch 75, Guttridge 50), and following on they put together 264 for six wickets (Beafr 69£. W. L. Murdoch 61, W. Newham 52, G. Braniinot put 3*). The northern papers blame the'^slowness of the Notts scoring for throwing away a Victory. In their next match, which was against Leicestershire, Notts were not '^well represented, but their opponents were- just aB badly, "off ,^ and ib -was a glorious triumph for\Leicebteißhire that they should win by 51 runs.' The match was played at Laiceßter, and the home team, going in first, scored 103, to" which Notts replied with 187 (Daft 59, Hardy 48). \ In their second innings, Leicestershire scored 27&'(Tomlin 105, Holland 72, 0. Marriott 37), and Notts, going in again, only scored 134 (Attewellsß), Finney's bowling proving very 'destructive. . Great exception has been' taken 1 to the wickets at Bramall lane, Sheffield, "this jear, and apparently with great justice, as the Surrey Eleven found to their cos£on,June 12. At the outset the pitch was dusty and towards the laßt file ball took/great pieces of turf away with, it. As a consequence the game was in a great measure a matter of luck, or at all events hardly a reliable lest of the relative merits of the opposing teams. It wa& a "bowler's matoh throughout. Yorkshire'Bcored 98 (Moorhouse 39) and 91 (Moorhouse itpt out 38). and as Surrey could only get 72; and 59, the Tyke* won by 58 runs. In thf first innings of the winning team Richardson .took nine wickets for 47 runs, and ib the second Lockwood captured eight at a cost 0f,' 39.' F6*f Yorkshire, ' Hirst secured in «1 eight- pickets for 55 runs and Wardall nine for the small j total or «*<J Prior to meeting Surrey; the Yorkshire team played— or rather outplayed— Essex at Leyton, defeating the sontherri county by ten wickets. Ejsex scored 184 (H. G, Owen ,Bß, Burns 48) and 144 (Freeman not out 41), while Yorkshire scored 303 (Tunnicliffe 48, Uly'ett not out 46, . Peel 45, Wainwright 38, >A> Sellars 31) and 27 * for no wickets. ' , '". " ' -'"' ' , , June 16, -thfe, Lontibn correspon- . dent of the Otago Dtfly^Tifce*; Bays :-" The Australiaa cricketers are npt; doing \much win- j nin'g. They have played, ll match'e>, and have won four and lost four, the pther three being j drawn. This is nob' .much; lot a record! They beat Cambridge University last; week by 117 runs, but were beaten' by the M;C;C with seven wickets to spare in the fitrst three days of this week. And it must be admitted'that th<sy were beaten on their merits. Ijto : unlucky incidents can be pleaded in* extenuation." ; When -the latter game was discontinued on Tuesday evening, the M..G.C. had 475 to make to win, and in view of the fine {tphill'game so often played by the colonists their ° friends still cherished hopes that th 6 sensational- finish of 1882- when, contrary 'to all- appearances, Australia 1 heatr'EngMd'. by, seven runs— might be repeated. Even "when - the two finest living bats, Dr W. G. Grace and Mr A. E. Stoddart, made 83 of the required 175, hope was not abandoned. A night's interruptionand a new start made all the difference in cricket, and had rain fallen in the interval the fortunes of the match might even then have been changed.] But the game was resumed 'on Wednesday nnder a cloudless sky and a -scorching sun,on a perfect wicket, and 'W. G.'arid Stoddart soon proved themselves to be in their finest form. I looked in at Lord's thinkipg I might Bee one of two things— either Grace or Stoddart might win the match oft their own bats, or else they might go out at once and the rest of the wickets might fall fact, .thus giving a colonial victory. Neither of these things happened. Grace and Stodoart batted superbly, the champion; indeed "playing at , times_ a slight tendency to reduced speed in running and showing a' decided profile as to his expand- . ing figure but yet playifag af' no -other' Bats- . man ever did, despite MaP atafi'st' half" century of age, and the younger hero hitting all round with the brilliancy and certainty which already have' given his name "world-wide fame. And one thing soon struck me very forcibly— the Aus- • traliaa bdwling lacked strength.. -,It was goodvery good— at times/but 'there wasa deficiency of what rude cricketers' call 'devil' about it. Even Turner was not up Jsdthe mark, and none of the others excepting Trumble seemed at,all formidable. Turner, Trott, 'M'Leod, and - Trumble were all tried ip succession, but still 120 went up in "an hour and a-qjiarter,*in spite of admirable fielding on the Australians' part. > But then came a change; which," had the bpwl/{ng only been stronger, might Have "inaugurated } a revolution in the fortunes of the'day— Grace was caught at mid-off by Tr^ott' after making 45 of the total 120. Only 11 runs more were made, and then Trumble-bowled Stoddart fojr 74.' 1 There were 44 runs stiU'wauted, and time was when Spofforth and Boyle would not have allowed them to be made. V JBut their successes could not 'prevent' it, and only one more wicket was lost before the' winning hit was given, and the Australians were beaten once more. I was surprisedVto' see a somewhat meagre attendance as compared-'with the usual rush .to 'see these great matche*, and I did not recognise a sinph New Zealancler among the visitors present". " * The averages of the Australians for the first 11 matohes of their -English tour— up to and including the return; match with theMarjlebone C.C., the scores in which' are published in this