NOTES BY SLIP.

Otago Witness, Issue 2242, 18 February 1897, Page 34

NOTES BY SLIP.

• . • In the match at Carisbrook last Saturday, Baker and Fisher each brought their aggregate scores in Cup matches this season to 300 runs exactly, and they have now precisely the same batting average. • . • Of the T*ieri Second Eleven who wore playing on the Carisbrojk ground last Saturday only two wore n-innels. The appearance of the field with nine players on it wearing tweeds can be imagined better than described. Surely the Taieri Club can in«i«t on its members being appropriately attired in a match. • . • Mr J. Smyth, hon. secretary for some years of the Otago Cricket Atsociation, is being removed to the establishment of Meesrs Sargood, Son, and Ewen in Perth. It would not be fitting that I should neglect the opportunity of once more bearing testimony to the energy and efficiency with which he discharged his duties as an official of tha O.C.A. With Rains, Tomlin, and Smyth Messrs Sargood's firm have the nucleus of a Dunedin cricketing eleven in their Perth house. • . • The reoord innings of the Midland Club against the Rivals in Wellington closed for 554. ' . • J. Phillips, while umpiring in the match between Victoria and New South Wales, received a c%ble announcing the death of his wife in England. • . • In a match at Wellington between the plumbing firms of Balltngor Bros, and Danks and Sou, a. player named Earushaw got double figures for the latter. Can ib be that our ex-M H R., who consigned us all to perdition, had taken to cricket ? • . • The delivery of T. Downes was the subi jeot of a good deal of comment oa the Carisj brook grouud on Saturday S-me good judges j declared i hat it was not bowling, while other ■ judges, equally competent, held that ib was perfectly fair. Without committing myself to ; an opinion one way or other, I would remark I that it is impossible for one t-> bs able to judge I on such a matter unless one has a side view of | the bowler, and it was without having such a ' view that some of those present condemned I Downes's bowling. I *. # Wuat is "throwing" as distinguished I from bowling ? So far an lam aware ib has not been laid down what constitutes throwing. This much I know, that during butt cricket season in England Mr Arthur Budd propounded a definition of throwing, and that definition was forthwith declared by Mr F Mitchell, the Cambridge captain, to be a fallacy. Mr Budd's definition i« as follows :—": — " If the lower arm is | flexed on the upper during the act of delivery it !is throwing." The practical meaning of tnab ig that if a player bends his arm in the act of delivery he throws and does not bowl, and th»t I know to be the view held by a good many cricketers on the subject. • . • But then Mr Mitchell replies : " The fa'lacy of this definition is apparent when one considers the number of people who bowl wibh j a bent arm. ... In my opinion, too little notice has been taken of the swing of the arm. If the swing is continuous, there can be no doubt about the fairness of the delivery. If, on the other hand, there bo such stoppage in the swing as to cause a jerk, then the bowling looks doubtful to the observer. There are,jione, so far as I know, of those bowlers whose action has never bsen questioned who have any stoppage in their swing, and, again, most of, those whose bowling has been called unfair have such a pause in their delivery." • . • Mr Mitchell's conclusion is that "itis a question with which it ia impossible to deal satisfactorily*," and until throwing is authoritatively defined it really seems ai if that were a reasonable conclusion. Those who buy aud keep Wisden's almanacks will recollect that in the 1895 number the opinions of a number of cricketers of the firso class were collected as to whether there had been much throwing in firstclass cricket inJ3ngland in the previous season, and, if so, as to the remedy The opinions were most conflicting. Some leading cricketers unhesitatingly affirmed that there bad been much j throwing, while others equally prominent expressed the view thab there had been nothing to complain of regarding the first-class bowlers. One of thoie whose opinion Wisden had sought — Mr Gregor M'Gregor, the international wicketkeeoer — confessed that he could nob take a very decided view, as it seemed to him that " fair bowling and throwing can be assimilated in a bowler's action by practice to such an extent that it is almost impossible to detect the precise ball which is the throw." • . * There are three points which Mr Mitchell regards as established : (1) That one cannot throw with a perfectly straight arm and an uninterrupted swing ; (2) that a throw is caused by flexing the arm ; (3) that there are fair bowlers who bowl with the arm flexed. The trouble really is, as I said before, thab no one has yet produced a definition which can be said to distinguish throwing from bowling, and our perplexity on the subject at this end of the world is nob likely to be removed by the fact that in' this year's " Wiiden," which is just out in the colonies, the editor, in reviewiug the Australian team, does not hetitate to express his opinion that under the laws of cricket the bowling of Jones aud M'Kibbin cannot be called fair. If Jones and MKibbin throw, then I fear that not only T. Downes but some others of our local trundlers musb be said to throw also. * . ■ In an interesting article on tho follow-on question the editor of this year's "WHden" makes an assertion, which is exceedingly interesting in view of George Giffen's statement that he has never assisted to prevent an opposing side following on when the follow-on appeared to be imminent. Writing about the incident in the Oxford-Cambridge match, the editor, Mr Sydney Pardon, perhaps the leading cricket writer in England, siys : — "As a matter of fact, Mr Frank Mitchell (the Cambridge captain), in what he believed to be the best interests of his side, only did in a palpable way what is often done less openly. For instance, at Canterbury in August, George Giffen, for the Australians, intentionally bowled three half volleys in succession without a word of protest being raised." * . * Prince Ranjibsinhji has been the recipient

of s very handsome present, given to him by the Sussex County Cricket Club. Ib is in the form of a silver gilt dessert service, consisting of »ix plates, four dishes, and an eporgue, and an elegantly- designed silver shield, upon which is inscribed the scores made by Ranjitsinbji for Suisex. Recently Prince Ranjits.nhji was entertained at a banquet by Indians in reiidence at Cambridge University. • . • In the match between Queensland and South Tasmania, which, as we learnt by cable, the latter won by nine wickets, Queensland scored 177 (Bradley 76, Jones 33, M'Glinohy 22) and 182 (Hoare not out 67, Bradley 47, M'Glinchy 17, Lewis 12) and South Tasmania 298 (Maxwell 51, Burn 46, Eady 43, Ward 40, Tabart not out 37, BiDgham 30, M 'Allen 23, Maoleod 10) and 62 for one wicket (Tabart not out 24, Maxwell 24, Macleod not out 13). The Queenslanders were placed at a disadvantage on the first day in having to commence the match four hours after they landed from a rough voyage from the Bluff. • . • J. B. Shiiton, the Warwickshire professional, who went out to the Cape for the benefit of his health, has baen sentenced to twelve months impriionment for having] obtained goods by false pretences at Capetown. He has, I fear, gone into quarters where hit health will not be much benefited. • . • Ono hundred and fifty-seven for .16 wicket* ! Suoh was the miserable outcome of the afternoon's play last Saturday between the Cariebrook and Grange elevens. The wioket, -too, was a good one. The only explanation that can reasonably be offered for the apparent triumph of the ball over the bat is that each side, too mindful of what was at stake in the match, feared the other's bowling, and that manifested itself in the extreme caution, amounting almost to timidity, which one batsman after the- other exhibited. Boundary hits were few and far between, although during Fisher's tenancy of the wioketi he found the rails on four or fire occasion!. The Cansbrook team underwent an alteration ab the last moment. The Match Committee concluded that it was necessary to strengthen the bowling, and oontequently they brought in Howden in place of Thomson. So far as the game has gone the promotion of Howden has been attended with the happiest result* for hie side, for he batted confidently, fielded well, and bowled successfully. * . * When the Carisbrook Club secured first use of the wickets they reckoned themselves, I believa I am correct in saying, good for well on for 200 runs. Liggios, whoie was the first wicket to fall, cannot be said to have deserved the score he got. He opened with a nice couple, and then lilted a b*H from A. Downes ro tho on. B^k>»r, usually a sure fieldsman, altogether misjudged the flight of the ball, going in for it when be should have gone back, and it fell on the track three or four yards behind him. Not content with that life, Liggins next touched a ball into the slips off T. Downes, who had the field arranged for him behind the wickets very much a< Jones, the Australian express bowler, had. From Liggios's bat the ball went straight and high towards Restieaux, who, however, let it Blip through his hands, and it went off at a tangent just over Johnston's head, that fieldsman making an ineffectual attempt to secure it. In the next over from A. Do if net, however, -Liggins settled himself by chopping a ball on to his stump*. • . ' When ttattray was associated with Morice an incident occurred which I cannot but regard as regrettable. Morice tipped a ball from T. Downes, and Bivker, one of the three or four who were fielding in the slips, secured it and began to play with it, while one or 'two others in the Grange t-am cried out, " Well caught." Morice stood his ground, and an appeal to the Grange umpire, who was ab the bowler's end, was answered in favour of the batsman. Baker did not appeal for a catch, but, by playing with the ball instead of at once returning it to the wicketkeeper or bowler, he gave colour to the claim for one that was made by others on his side, and a weak umpire might under suoh circumstances have been flurried into giving a batsman out, even though by so doing he might bo acting contrary to bis own judgment. T. Downes was commanding considerable pace, and his bowling was bumping a good deal. Haydon's hands began to get so knocked about that he retreated from the wickets to the safer post of short stop, while It *t tray sought protection in batting gloves, which he rarely wears. At 21 Alex. Downes senh up Rattray a ball which invited clouting to the fence, bat the Carisbrook captain got ib on the ed«e of his bat, and it went inttead into Rdstieaux's hands * . * The longest partnership of the day was that between Morice and Fisher. The latter wisely played his true game, and while he was batting some lively cricket was witnessed. An exceedingly sweet cut to the rails off A. Downes was early credited to him, and among the best of his other strokes was a drive for four off T. Downes ; while, as affording some idea of the pace at whioh the latter was sending them down, it may be meationed that Fisher got three runs from a ball which he simply blocked and which travelled past the bowler. Meanwhile Morice had been adding quietly to hit score. A. Downes sent him down some enticing ones, but he was not to be tempted, except on one occasion when he drove a ball loftily but safely to the off. When Parker went on himself to bowl vice T. Downes there was a collapie on the part of the batting team. A. Downes, knowing Fisher's weakness, industriously fed him to secure a return, and surely enough he got it, Fisher marring his effective display by the termination of it, a ball being softly spooned up by him ; while Morice, who had played a very serviceable innings and treated the'bowling as if he intended to remain all the afternoon at the wicket*, was at sea as soon as the Grange captain wtnb on, and had his stump* scattered by him. • . • Three wickets for 56 did not give promise of a long innings, bub when seven were down for 71, Spraggon, Hope, and Barton having gone in the meantime, the prospect for Carisbrook was distinctly gloomy. Hops and Borton were each dismissed by a capital catch by Lawrence. For each of them a trap was set by A. Downes, and each of them fell into tha trap. When Lawrence snapped Hope up he' was standing ia some nondescript position which could not be called either mid-on or long-on, but was something between the two, and the catch from Borton was taken by him right ab the boundary. Eich catch was effected from a low, skimming stroke, and well merited the applause bestowed on the fieldsman. Borton enjoyed one life more than he wag -entitled to. A ball from A Downes was popped by him into the hands of Parker at point, but out it popped again. It was a carious feature of the afternoon's play that while the ground fielding was generally of a high order and some admirable catches were made, there were also several chances missed, and those by player* who are not in the habit of refusing catches. • . • Harkness had a singularly eventful innings. He had not been long in when he returned a ball to A. Downes. It was obviously a bump ball, but the bowler seemed to think otherwise, and to«sed the ball up when he caught ib. The appeal to the umpire — the Carisbrook umpire on this ocoasion— was of coarse in favour of the batsman. An oref

or two later Harkness tipped a ball from T. Downes, who had resumed bowling, and Haydon catching it there was an almost unanimous appeal. The umpire — the Grange umpire ag«in, Mr Lawlor — had not observed the 'tip, and the ball not having been turned, gave the batsman not out. Then uprose a section of the spectators in their might and hooted and demanded that the umpire should be . changed. Needless to say he wasn't. Mr Lawlor mide a mistake — Harkneßs admits that he tipped the ball and was out — but no umpire is infallible, and every umpire must give his decision according to his own judgment. It was, however, to say the least, singular that in the course of a short innings there should have been tbe three appeals for catches that I have mentioned, each decided in favour of the batsman. • . * The last decision in favour of Harkness did not, however, affect the game much. Both Austin and he were beaten by T. Downes'a pace, and with the ecore at 87 Howden, the last man, joined Bart. The chances seemed to be altogether against the Carisbrook total reaching threß figures, bub one can never be sure in crioket, and so it was on this occasion. Howden batted with as much confidence a 9 anyone on his side, and went fearlessly out to each bowler, meeting their deliveries with the full face of bis bat. Burt made a few nice strokes also, but expended a great deal of euorgy fruitlessly iv cutting furiouily at the air on several occasions nft-r the ball had passed him. Byes helped -the score along too, and not only was the 100 signalled, but another 10 wis all but gained, (lie innings closing at 109 through Parker, who again displaced T. Downea, bowling Burt. The partnership of the last two men had, barring that of Fisher and Morice, been the most profitable of the innings. ' . • It ha* come to be an accepted thing that Baker and Johnston opeu the Grange innings. The latter, by the way, had dur.ug the week had an experience which he will not wibh repeated. On the Sunday he had gono out to Lawyer's Head, and he was there indulging in the delight of a sirim in the surf. He was, however, carried by the backwanh off a rock ou to which he had got, and iv the 6trong current that -prevails off tbe Head he would have succumbed if assistance had not been afc hand. He got a few monthfuls of salt water, and had once disappeared wheu he was hauled out insensible by some telegraph officials, expert swimmers, who happened to be bathing further out than he was. It was gratifying to find Johnston on Saturday none tbe wurse for the experience he. had had six days previously, when he had gone the length of kuocUing at, without entering, Death's door. Baker and he com- I menced very cautiously to the bowling of Fisher ] and Hope, but when only 9 had been made I Johnston was out iv the same tray as the first j of the opposing t«ain had gone — a ball being played by him on to his wicket. • . ' Alex Dowues, who partnered Baker, did { not go in for any lashing while he was in. He made one pretty cut, and set-med to be fettling down to steady play wheu a poor ball from Hope brought about his dismissal. It was a bumpy ball to leg, and Downes, sweeping round, sent it in the direction of short leg, and HowdeD, running across, very snsartly accepted the ch«nco. Baker meanwhile had bsen plod- ] ding along, his principal stroke up to this time having been a straight drive to the railu off , Fisher, and that should only have produced a single, for Austin, running ronnd from the long field-on, got in front of tbe ball, only to let it pass through his leg*. Parker, who followed { Downes in, scored more rapidly thau anyone on his side, but there were no hits of consequence. His first runs came in the slips off Hope, whom he also drove nicely to the track. • . ' One over of Fisher's, while Parker and . Baker were together, was an unlucky one for 1 the bowler, as each of the batsmen gave what ' were possible chances aud each escaped. Parker put one up towards third man, where Liggins jumped for, and seemed to touch, but did not secure, the ball That stroke produced three, and immediately afterwards Baker put one up in the slips just over Hope's head. The partnership had yielded 19 ruus when a yorker from Fisher dismissed Parker and Restieaux came iv. Now, Restieaux is a left-handed batsman, and Fisher aud Hope are both left-handed bowlers. Cricketers, or somt of them, have a theory that a left-hander cannot bowl to a left-hander. For that reason in one of the matches this season between New South Wales and Victoria, Coningham, a left-handed bowler, though he had been' successful at the crease, was taken off immediately Bruce came iv, and he remained off until Bruce went out. Whether Rattray believes in the theory or not I do not know, but coincident with Restieaux's advent Howden took Hope's place at the crease. • . • As three wickets were at the time down for 35, and Hope had secured cue of those wickets aud had had about the casio Dumber of runs hit off him iw had come from Fisher's bowling, and as Fisher h*d only jast got his second wicket, until which time his average was not better than Hope's, it did seem as though the theory to which I have alluded had something to do with' Howden's going on to bowl. Whether that was so or rot the move was immediately successful, though not perhnps in the manner anticipated. So long as Baker remained at the wickets, so long was there hope for the Grange. Off Howden's secoLd ball, however — the first having beeu despatched by Restieaux to the on boundary — Baker was out leg before, the decision being that of the Grange umpire. There is no doubt that the increased watchfulness of the bowling that Baker has cultivated has led to his dragging his leg in front of the wicket. The habit is one that he should be at all sorts of pains to get rid of. Not content with securing Baker's wicket Howden appropriated Haydon's next over, and as Fisher yorked Best, three wickets falling for an addition of seven runs, the Grange are in a bad way. The curious thing — it the surmise is correct that it was to get rid of the left-hander that Howdeu went on— is that the left-hander is still there. Lawrence, T. Downes, and Turnbull are the batsmen who have to go in. i • . • Kinvig is securely maintaining the lead in the aggregate individual scores iv the Senior Cup matches for the season, and if he utilises advantageously his opportunity next Saturday when he resumes his unfinished innings against the Opoho — say, if he puts a ceulury to bis credit — he will once more h»ve the highest average to his credit, unless indeed, Restieaux successfully resists the Carisbrook bowling and carries out his bat for the Grange. Kiuvig has been scoriug so consistently well in interclub matches during the seaion that I hope he will not neglect to do likewise in Christchurch next week ; and in this connection I would remind the Otago captain that Kinvig's best scores have all been made when he has gone in first, r.nd so has not had to endure the suspense of waiting for his turn. There are some players to whom it is a very trying ordeal to wat for their turns. Croxford fairly with Kinvig the reputation for consistent run-getliug in the Dunedin team ; but his scoreß have bien on a more modest scale, yet always, or nearly always, oT at least respectable dimensions. But what about the Opoho team ? Their howling was below the m*rk on Saturday, and their oatting was disappointing in the re.«pect that the men who should have come off failed to do

so. Clarke has contented himself in bis Iswfj } three inuings with scraping into doublea. We are all in hopes that he is reserving himself for the Canterbury match. A couple of contribution! such as came from his bat at Lanoaster Park this time two years ago will suffice. • . * It is not before it was time that the Albion have discovered in Gibson & bowler who can secure wickets atasmall cost. His success j on the past two Saturdays has been most dis- ! tinot. The manner in which the Albion bowl- j ing is manipulated is somewhat peculiar, otherwise one might have expected that the average Gibson obtained on last Saturday week wonld have ensured hi 9 being tried earlier against the Carisbrook Bees, who were not so busy on this ! oocasion au they might have been expected to ] be. Gibson's pertormance in taking seven wickets for 15 runs has been discounted by the assertion that he bowled with some luck. What is luck on one side, my contention is, generally means bad play on the other side If a player sacrifices his wickoh by bad play, I protest entirely against the suggestion that the bowler who obtains credit for the wicket is assisted by luck. The element of luck does not enter nearly bo much into cricket as some people imagine. The Aloion are, however, not merely badly off for bowlers, they are weak in batting also. Their opponents met them on Saturday with one bowler in the person of G Harraway, two other bowlers* (Howden and Harkness) having beeu transferred to the A team to strengthen the latter' 3 attack, and yet the Albion were dismissed for 64 ruiis. cue of the smallest of their totals for the season. T Have they not, like the Opoho, gos some seuoad eleven men who could iuf aso some fresh vigour into the spiritless bitting of the (i 1 st. team ? • . • The composition of tha Otn.go team for the match against Canterbury giveß fairly geuer*l satisfaction The only debatable point is whether Parker should hava ber-u chooeo. , Some would prefer him to Hope, some would i prefer him to Ra*tray, some would preler him, perhaps, to Sprang >v. My ouly ftar is that there may not b- enough bowliug in the team, and that too much dependence may have been X plttced on Fisher and Downed. If the wickefc should turn out to assist the bowler no Otajjau will have much doabb as to the result, but it | may be taken for granted that the Cantoibury,; team will be very strong in batting, and if i the match should ba played on a ba'.sman's \ wicket the want of a clow bowler may be felt. Th6re are Hope and Kinvig, no doubt, to help Fisher and Downes, who are themselves a powerful pair ; but the question remains, is there enough of bowling there ? Two years ago the Otago team had a rather exhausting time in the field in their opponents' second inningi, and then they had Fisher, Downes, Hope, and Parker, besides whom Clayton and ; Rains were also both tried May it not be that the Otago Association's Match Committee are j overestimating the strength of our bowling, and, ! what is the same thiug, underestimating the strength of the Canterbury batting ? Let us hope it is not so. • . ' The Senior Cup matches in Cbristchurch were contiuued on Saturday, with the following results :— Midland, 304 (D. Reese 128, Macfarlane 27), v. Lancaster P*rk Thirteen, 56 and 27 ' (Stephenßon capturing seven wickets for 13 and Ponrce four for 11) ; United Eleven, 146 and 100 for five wicketa (Clark 33, Wilson 23, R. D. Himuan not out 22), v. Sydenhsmand Addingtoo Thirteen, 131 nnd 112 (Walo ls le.y 25, Liffertv 20. Jones 16) ; United Thirteen, 121 (Vincout 40), v Lancaster Park Eleven, 191 and 138 for eight wickets (H. C. Ridley 35, North i 31, A. E. Ridley not out 21). . ' . The Cup Committee of the Otago Cricket > Association have awarded the Junior Cup match Gransre v. Waverley, played on January 30, to the Waverley, in consequence of senior players having been included in tho Grange roam. In the Junior Cup match Albion v. Grange, played ou the 6th iost., the game will count as a less to both clubs, since each club played senior men.