NOTES BY SLIP.

Otago Witness, Issue 2105, 28 June 1894, Page 33

NOTES BY SLIP.

The Marylebone Club consisted in 1893 of 3941 members. The Earl of Jersey, late Governor of New South Wales, succeeds to the presidency of the club.

As the result of a consultation amongst the captains of the first-class counties the following resolution has been approved :—": — " That the matches played by the following four counties (Derbyshire, Essex, Leicestershire, and Warwickshire) against the counties at present styled first-class, and also against one another and against M.C.C, should be regarded as first-class matches, and the records of the players engaged in those matches shall be included in the list of first-class averages." The seniors' match at Cambridge University was productive of very high scoring, 1249 runs being registered at an expense of 33 wickets. C. J. Pope's 6ide scored 260 and 439, and J. J. Robinson's 521 and 29 for no wicket.

Notts, playing without Shrewsbury and Gunn, opened the season badly, being defeated by Warwickshire by six wickets. The lace countymen scored 149 (Daft 54) and 275 (Daft 66, Flowers 53, J. A. Dixon 37, Mcc not out 35) to Warwickshire's 351 (J. E. Hill not out 139, Law 58, W. Quaife 39, Shilton 30) and 74 for four wickets.

On April 21, at Burnley, England, died H. Reynolds, who, born on January 1, 1847, played for Notts during the early seventies. The deceased made his first appearance for the county in 1872, in which year also Barnes and Morley found their way into the eleven. In 1874 Reynolds assisted England in their match at Canterbury against Kent and Gloucestershire, scoring 57 and 7 and taking a turn with the ball, and he also played for the North against the South at Tunbridge Wells.

Playing against the M.C.C. on May 7, Notts — still deprived of the services of Shrewsbury and Gunn— suffered another defeat, being beaten by eight wickets, their scores being 95 (Flowers not out 67) and 124- against the M.C.C.'fl 180 (Lord Hawke not out 47, Chatterton 36) and 40 for two wickets. Martin bowled with great success for the winners, and his record for the mateh — 10 wickets for 30 runs — is one of rare description. On May 7, at Kennington Oval, the Surrey Eleven entered upon their programme of matches, but were handsomely beaten by Warwickshire by seven wickets. The visitors made 242 (W. G. Quaife 92, J. E. Hill 36, H. W. Bainbridge 34), to which Surrey answered with 98 (Abel 32) and 207 (K. J. Key 60, Brochwell 49). Warwickshire requiring 64 to win, scored the number with the loss of three wickets. In Santall, a Peterborough man, Warwickshire have (sajs the Field) discovered a young bowler of considerable promise. He took five wickets for 51 in Surrey's second innings.

Wet weather limited the play in the match between M.C.C. and Lancashire at Lord's in the second week of May to a dismissal of the county team, who were disposed of for 77, J. T. Hearne claiming nine wicket 3 for 43 runs. For the M.C.C. 12 runs were scored without the loss of a wicket.

Unfortunately for Briggs, the deserving Lancastrian, the weather reduced the match between Yorkshire and Lancashire, played for his benefit, to little more than a day, but with subscriptions it is hoped that the beneficiare will net over £1000. Lancashire scored 50 and 98

to Yorkshire's 152 (Mounsey 36), the latter, for whom Hirst bowied with great success, winning by an innings and four runs.

The Derbyshire Eleven celebrated their elevation to first-class cricket rabher inauspiciously by being defeated by Surrey by an innings and 40 run 3. The Peak Couuty team only scored 85 (L. G. Wright 30) and 63, Richardson capturing ten wickets for 53 runs, while Smith, a young left-handed bowler, also did creditably. Surrey put together 188, W. W. Read making 41, Hayward 35, and K. J. Key 30.

On May 15 the Warwickshire Eleven secured their third consecutive victory of the season, defeating a strong batting side of Kent by eight wickets. Kent were dismissed for 58 and 157 tF. Macchant 30), while Warwickshire scored 113 (H. W. Bainbridge carrying his bat through for 65) and 104 tor two wickets (Diver not out 68, W. G. Quaife not out 28). In the first innings of Kent, Palletb acheived a remarkable performance with the ball, capturing seven wickets for 13 runs.

After three days of consistently high scoring a match between Hampshire and Derbyshire was drawn at Southampton on May 16. Derbyshire made 248 (Storer 90, L G. Wright 53), to which Hants replied with 202 (A. J. Hill 72, Captain Quinton 49).' The second innings of Derbyshire was closed with four wickets down for 310 (L G. Wright not oub 171, Sborer not out 39, Chatterton 32), and Hants then put together 220 for five wickets (Barton 69, A. J. Hill 59, Captain Quinton not out 32).

The Gloucestershire Eleven opened the seasoa auspiciously with a creditable victory over Sussex at Brighton on May 16. The home team scored 218 (W. Newham 55, W. L. Murdoch 46, Marlow 34) and 73, while Gloucestershire made 259 (W. G. Grace 88, W. Troup 46, Brown 41, Painter 37) and 35 for two wickets. Roberts took seven wickets for 22 runs in the second innings of Sussex.

Though they played up pluckily at the finish, Essex were beaten by Leicestershire on May 16 by 68 ruaa. Leicestershire scored 131 (C. E. de Trafford 70, Chapman 34) and 267 (Pougher not out 109, Holland 50) to the 57 and 273 (H. G. Owen 76, Burns 36, H. Hailey 35) of Essex. Pougher was the most successful bowler in the match

Gunn and Shrewsbury were sbill absent from the Notts Eleven when the team on May 14 tackled Surrey, and the latter had much the best of the play, which did not extend into three days, winning by an innings and 9 run 3. Richardson's bowling was the feature of the match, thirteen wickets falling to him at a cost of 99 runs. Notts made 93 and 135 (Flowers 43) against Surrey's 242 (Abel 63, Hayward 41, Maurice Read 30).

The match between Middlesex and Somersetshire, played at Lord's on May 14, was for Sberwin's benefit. Zumaaarset scored 58 and 113 (W. N. Roe 43), while Middlesex made 142 (P. J. T. Hensry 39, A. E. Stoddart 32) and 32 for n j wickets, tha metropolitans winning with ten wickets to spare. Rawlin took ten wickets for Middlesex at a cost of only 53 runs.

Few people have done more for cricket than " Billy" Burrup, who founded the Surrey Club, and was for a quarter of a century its energetic secretary. An accident cut short Mr Burrup's career as a player many years ago, though he still, as a hale old gentleman of 73, takes a keen interest in the game. It was he who first started Anglo-Australian matches. He went down to Liverpool to see the first team off — early in the fifties — advanced £150 apiece for their expenses, and settled with a bailiff's man, who came down just as the ship was starting with a writ for the arrest of one of the best players, without whom the trip would probably have been a failure.

In last month's New Review Mr gpofforth gives us the concluding instalment of his interesting reminiscences of Anglo -Australian cricket : —

The " demon bowler" refers at some length to the famous 1882 match at the Oval, when Australia defeated England for the first time. Commencing the second innings with only 85 runs to win, the first three of England's wickets realised 49. At this point the Hob. Alfred Lyttelton and A. P. Lucas were associated, and played so carefully that at one period 12 consecutive maidens were sent down :—: —

" The bowlers finding it impossible to break through the batsmen's defence, it was decided to mis-field a ball in order that the batsmen might change ends, and the stratagem worked, for Lyttelton was bowled at once. I shall never forget the excitement at this point ; it beggars language. By slow degrees, amid infinite breathless eagerness, the wickets were got rid of, and at last England was beaten by seven runs. Much has been written of this match, and much unfairly. Some writers have attributed the English defeat to a lack of nerve on the part of C. T. Studd which tempted Peate to hit, because, as he said, ' he couldn't trust Mr Studd.' But it is scarcely just to judge a nun who never had a ball in the second innings. If there was lack of nerve anywhere, the balance was on our side. Our men in the first innings were paralysed, and yet not one of the English bowlers was breaking an inch. Indeed, Massie told me that he got out in tho second innings trying to knock A. G. Steel off, because that bowler, for the first time in the match, was beginning to get a little work on. I firmly believe that he was the only bowler on the English side who managed to break the ball. Against plain bowliog of this kind it is absurd to say that our batting form was represented by a score of 63 ; the failure was altogether due to lack of nerve. On the other hand, throughout both the English innings I was breaking back quite six inches, and towards the end of the second innings the ball probably broke as much as a foot. As the match went towards the finish it is indisputable that England might have won, but it is difficult to lay the blame on any one person. But perhaps the fault lay with Alfred Lyttelton more than with anyone else. Not that he lost his nerve— his pluck was indomitable ; not that he played incorrect cricket — his style was unimpeachable ; but simply and solely because he did play correctly, fatally correctly. It was a desperate case ; the bowler at one end was, as I have said, breaking a foot every ball, while Boyle was bowling with machine-like precision. But Boyle never could command a break, and I firmly believe that if Alfred Lyttelton had jumped out and hit him, England would have won the match. Let me not be misunderstood. Boyle never bowled better in his life, and, under ordinary circumstances, Alfred Lyttelton played the right game. But it was an extraordinary occasion, demanding extraordinary measures, and I believe that the game lay in Lybtelton's hands had he adopted more daring tactics." [The scores in this match were — Australia, 63 (Blackham 17, Murdoch 13, Garrett 10) and 122 (Massie 55, Murdoch 29). England, 101 (Ulyett 26, M. Reid 19, Steel 14, Barlow 11) and 77 (W. G. Grace 32, Lybtelton 12, Ulyett 11.] Speaking of the leading English cricketers with whom he has done battle, Mr Spofforth says : —

••In my opinion there is only one W. G. Grace, and there will never be another. It is not only his stupendous capacity as a cricketer that commands admiration ; there is his whole physique to bs reckoned with. Hs seems different from all other cricketers— a king apart. I

never see him in the field but I am reminded of my boyish days, when our schoolmaster used to join in our game and teach us the way. W. G. Grace is like a master among pupils ; there miy arise pupils hereafter who will be no less skilful with bat and ball, but they will never command the permanent and world-wide reputation of the mau who first taught as to play. It is a unique position, and one which no true cricketer will grudge him. To-day wo have Gunn, Shrewsbury, and A. E. Stoddart, each of them a notable example of a man who has studied and thought out the game in all its bearings ; nor indeed is it easy to say which is the greatest of the three. For myself, I am sure that, in the matter of science, Stoddart is unapproached. It is wonderful to watch him when he pulls, to notice the effect this stroke, as he applies it, ha* upon the opposing bowlers, making them lose their length and their heads. W. W. Reid could pull, but Stoddart has achieved perfection in the stroke."

la comparing the English cricketers of today with those of Australia, Mr Spofforth admits that the old country has a heavy advantage. The Australians have improved in batting, and have made immense progress in style ; but, with the exception of C. T. B. Turner, there is not a good bowler in the whole of the colony. England, however, in Mr Spofforth's opinion, musb rouse herself if she wishes to retain her superiority in the field unchallenged :—: —

"Of late years there have been signs that batting is on the wane in England, and the principal field of failure is the universibies. The Cambridge Eleven of 1878 and the Oxford team of 1884 could have played, I believe, any 18 university players of the last few ye*rs ; and with the dual exception of F. S. Jackson and L. C. H. Palairct, not a single cricketer has been turned out recently worthy to take rank with the Lytteltons, tho Steels, the Studds, A. P. Lucas, tha Hon. Ivo Bligh, W. H. Patterson, and T. C. O'Brien. There are the gods now, as there were then ; and Shrewsbury, Gunn, and A. Stoddart are doubtless as good as the best of the old regime ; but the rank-and-file of first-clabs cricket has deteriorated, and if the sons of English cricketers hope to maintain the reputation of their country upon the field, they will do well to take a lesson from the fathers, and to remember that the style, which may now be growing old-fa3hioned, has stood England in good stead iv the past, and may well help her to fresh and greater victories in future."