CRICKET.

Otago Witness, Issue 2685, 30 August 1905, Page 58

CRICKET.

NOTES BY LONG SLIP. | A sum of £3617 19s was taken at the gates and stand at the third test match. Fifty-four thousand! nine hundred and ninety-one people paid for admission. The , Australians receive £1300 as their share. I A wonderful performance with the ball , was done by W. Brearley, the fast bowl jr. - It was in a match between Lancashire and Somerset. In the first innings he took r.irie ( wickets for 47 in 12.4- overs, and in the second eight for 90 in 23 overs. At one time ho scoured four wickets with successive balls. It is not generally known that a few days before the mail left Syd. Gregory, the Australian cricketer-, was down with an attack of sunstroke. In these England and Australian matches we require men to play the game for Eng- ! land, and none know this better thin ' Maclaren (says an English writer), who is himself credited with the remark that every mail played for batting in thf^o thieo-days matches should try to score afc i the rate of 40 runs an hour to give his fcide j a chance of victory. I In making" 92 for the Australians agairu.fc Hampshire, Victor Trumper batted only an i hour and a-quarter, "and the manner m i which he hit numerous balls from Baldwin ■ off the middle stump to square leg was • dazzling. He maxle every sort of stroke ' with inimitable skill, and hit a six, 14 fours, three threes, and 4 twos." ; Up to the end of June W. W. Armstrong- \ ■had taken 20 catches for the Australian -i Eleven, F. Layer being next with 16, V. i Trumper 13, K. A. Duff, J. Darling, and < M. A. Noble 10 each. Newla-ndi had se- ! i oured 10 and Kelly 9 cafcolies. At that ' i time Butt had taken 36, Hunter 27. Oatos i 24, Humphries 22, and Lilley 16 oatcbes as 1 wicket-keepers. These figures point to a i marked weakness in the wicket-keeping for J the Australian Eleven. ~ j A good bowling- performance was put up 1 .by Brearley f/SK Ijhe Gentlemen against tiie^]

* Playora of England, when he secured sevon ? wickets for 104 runs. 1 On the occasion of Madame Metba's 2 birthday tho Australian cricketers sent nor 2 a bat tied with their colour*, and inscribed r wnh their name. J Among- the rules which a certain cricket - oapiain will have to embody m his coda ) is that all bowlers shall bring with them a r spare pair of boots which fit them. There , was an imtailng delay at the Oval in Ihe I Australian match in May because of a rr.i 1-- . hap to a heel of one of the boots of N. >. Knox, though it wa^ the Australians who i suffered ; and now we are told by the > Dark Blue skipper — in his journalistic role ; and as an "exclusive"' — that he had to take [ off W. H. B. Evans because he, too, on , Friday met with a mishap to one of his boot*, and had not with him any others , that he could wear in comfort. Fancy a , 'Varsity match lost in sensational sly!-* because one of the bov.l-crs did not> brin^ a second pair of boots! And apparrniiy the loss of length. and jiaco was due to this cause, of which we "common or gar* 'en" pressmen were blissfully ignorant and remained unenlightened. — London Sportsman. Playing for tho Gentlemen of England against the Players a few days before the mail left, Polham Warner complied 59 and 97. Bosanquet in the sanio match put together 53 and 19. The Flavors won by 149 runs. The fallowing remarks by A. C. Jk'aclaren will appeal to many erieketors: "Fifteen days are now taken up by inrcri national cricket (the word test is so fallacious that it is bettor left out) whore.-!-? but 18 days at most would be required for games which would be finished, and would be a test. Nowadays a change of front has been adopted, since it has been sta'.cci that county cricket should be. put on oi,o , side and everything sacrificed for 'tho testa. ! I ask why this change should now be requested at a time when sacrifices are mad© only for a series of drawn games, as annoying to the players as they are to the unfortunate spectators. It is expected that the recent defeats of the Australian Eleven in the test matches will do no end of good for future Australian cricket teams visiting England, inasmuch as some of the old stagers will have to inako room for younger and better players. 1 As giving some idea of the importance of a test match in England from a now-* P".£er point of view it may be mentioned , that during the third test match over 3300 press messages, containing 209,000 woi-ds, were* despatched. Tho messages were transmitted at the rate of 250 words per minute. Ten men wer« kept continuously oocupie<l in preparing slips for tho instruments, whi ;h were kept running continuously from 10 a.m. until 11 p.m. Speaking at the -annual meeting of tl c Midland Cricket Club (Christchurch), ITr ' J. D. Lawrence said he- believed there was i a certain amount of opposition to the district cricket' scheme, which had not been sl'.own at club meetings, but was likely to bp. expressed' at the next meeting of the Cricket Association. In the match between Hampshire snd the Australians, Clemeut Hill made 115. But when h:s score was 22 he was beaten by Perase, and the ball hit the wickefc hard without removing the bails — a piece of execrable luck for the bowler and his county. In the Oxford and Cambridge match, Henley, the Oxford nlayer, was completely beatea by Morcom, the ball hitting lis pads, going or to the wicket and thence to tha- boundary. Bufc the bails were not removed. ] Incidents such as the above (says Cricket) happen &o often, and are so entirely unsatisfactory, that it seems about time something was don© to prevent a bowler from being deprived 1 of the rewaid of his skill. . It is bad enough for a bowler, when th© wicket does not* help him in the least, to have catches dropped, but it is wicked to have to see his efforts thrown , away when he has fairly and squarely beaten a man, and bit the wicket. If nothing can be done to make bails more sensitive to the touch of a ball against the stumps, a law might be made by which if an umpire was satisfied that the ball hit the wicket he might give th© batsman, out. There is not one case in ten in which the bowler's umpire does not know when a ball has hit the wicket without removing the bails. Bowlers have- so little d-cne for them that they surely ought not t*> be handicapped in a most unfair manner because the bails decline to fall off wJien a batsman has been bowled. The match between Oxford and Cam- i bridge was won by Cambridge by 40 runs. Cambridge scored' 218 and 264- (R. Young 51 and 0, Keiioir 50 and 8, Colbeck 1 and' 107, M'Bonald 6 and 60). Oxford scored 319 and 123 (J. C. Raphael 99 and 6, E. I/. Wright 95 and 26). Of the 71 matches played Cambridge has won 34 to Oxford's 20, while seven have been drawn. In the county match between. Surrey and Lancashire, played on July 6, 7, and 5, the former won by 10 wickets : Lancashire 186 and 159 (R. H. Spooner 47 and 6, Tyldesley I 31 and 15, H. G. Grinott 36 and 47, Sha.rp , 30 and 40. Sxirrey, 339 (Hay ward 68, Hayes 64, Baker 57, Davis 45). Lees took seven wickets for 95, and 1 Knox eight for 75. Nowadays it is customary to play the best wioket-keeper (so great is bis value to the side) in virtue of his keeping alone. If he can bat well and make a few runs | so much the better. The surprising part is that amongst the many very good wicketkeepers in England so few are really capable batsmen. Both Lilley and -Martyn, however, are class performers. Most people regard wicket-keeping as a hard nud rather thankless job — all kicks and no halfpence, but, like fishing, it has a great charm and fascination unrealisable to any except the skilled performers themselves. One might almost draw a parallel between the Waltonian art and wicket-k^epmg- in. something like the following terms: — "Sometimes you get a bite and make a 'catch' ; sometimes you get a bite- and mi^s the 'fish' " ; and, as an Irishman might say: "Sometimes you get 'em when you don't get 'em." by which he would mean a useless variety o£ fish to be thrown in the water agaia or a catch negatived by the umpire's "Not out!" During the match between Laneavii'-e and Somerset Walter JBrearley achieved the distinction of obtaining four wickets with consecutive balls, he being the firsi amateur to accomplish the feat in a- firstclass match, whilst the fact that all four wickets were bowled oown makes the performance altogether remarkable. He obtained two victims with the last two balls he delivered in the first innings, whilst with the first two balls he sent down when Somerset went in a second time he again proved as successful. The wickets ho lowered were those of Cranfield 1 , Bucknall, H. Ma-rtvn, and Hardy, in the order t

on named. Th? first man to di^pos" of four batsmen in succession was Wells (J.) — tho x - s father of H G. Well*, the well-known un . novelist — who performed the feat for Kent o^l against Sussex at Br'g-hton. in 1662. Sinca tlwn it has been accomplished by: — Ulyelt ■ot (^-)- England ■* . New South Wales, at Syd,i^ ney, 1579 ; Nash (G.). Lancashire v. Somcr-t a sot, at Manchester, 1832; Shailton (J. E.), r0 Warwickshire v. Leicestershire, at Edghe baston 1388; Hid- (J.), Sussex v. M.O.C. j,. and Ground, at Lord's, 1890; Loclnvood v (\V. II.), Surrey v. Warwickshire, at the [ 1O OvaJ, 1891; Shacklocfc (F.), Notts v. Somerl, e set. ab Nottingham. 1893; Martin (F.), [j(1j (1 AI.C.C. and Ground v. Derbyshire, at [!p Lord's, 1595; Mold (A.). Lancashire v. in Notts, at Nottiiigahm, 1895; W. Brearley, |j' g Lancashire v. _ Somerset, aI Manchester, a A point bliat calls for legislation is that ' , which provides foi- a batsman being"stumpable"' if he leaves one wicket, and ly not the othef, through retirement brought j. o about by mistaking the umpire's decision, j>> or believing to bo out and not waiting- foi0 . a, decision. There have been many oases in which a batsman has lost his wicket ic j because of the position cf the pavilion, , c one of the most remarkable (says "Shortid slips") being C. MXeod's dismissal in a 0 _ test match on the Sydney Cricket Ground. „. He Tvas bovrlcd by Richardson; the umpiro had called "no ball," which the batsman c . did nob hear, and he advanced from the . crease to the pavilion; then he was run j,' out. Had the pavilion been on the other I side of tho ground, so that M'Leod would ," s . have had to walk behind the wicket, ha j r could not_ have been put out, even if he ,j had go* into bis dressing room. Remenilt ber tho case of Stoddarl, when he wa.* c1 caught by Garrett at mid-off. I ventura 0 to, say that the only men on the ground 3 who thought Stoddart was not out were s " Stoz-er at the opposite end and the umpire. ' c Stoddart retired voluntarily; when he gofe r _ to the pavilion Sfeorer made some remarlc. ,_ which led to a reply from the umpire; , then followed the question put by Storer f as to whether his captain was out. and the official reply was tJiat he was not out~ Q Storer then called to Stcddarfc, who wa» brought from his dressing room, and die resumed his innings. Had Stoddart to go forward to the pavilion he could have been run out. The umpire should have the , power to form an opinion as to whether q the batsman was trying 1 for a run or ren tiring through a misunderstanding, and if the latter there should be the power of ' recall. Glancing through some old files of th§ Sydney Mail (1885), I came across the ; following incident:— ln Albert v. Carlton, D. W. Gregory bowled to F. Elliott, who * ran ovtt to hit, and missed. The batsman went so far from his crease that he gave up all effort to get back, being apparently \ satisfied that the wicketkeeper had stumped him. When he had gone as far as the 5 pavilion, which was behind the wicket, thu ' unipire was asked how it was. He Teplied, 1 '"Not out." Thereupon the wicketkeeper took up tho ball and knocked the wiekefc down, and again appealed, and again the umpire said, "Nob out," This was a similar case to one on the same ground, in which the wicketkeeper was G. Marshall and the batsman S. Jones. In the match. Yorkshire v. Essex Rhodes took sis of the laser's wickets for nine runs. COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP. LONDON, August 27. By- defeating Lancashire and drawing with Essex (despite Essex's innings of 521 and the dismissal of Yorkshire for 98, Douglas performing the hat trick), York- • shire is assured of the county cricket championship.