OLD-TIME CRICKET

Waipa Post, Volume 49, Issue 3504, 11 August 1934, Page 10

OLD-TIME CRICKET

THREE SHINS AN HOUR ! DASHING BATSMEN OP YORE. Modern batsmen are so frequently condemned for slow play that one wonders how the impatient ban-acker of to-day would feel if by a miracle he could be forced to watch some of the matches of a hundred years ago (writes " Old Sport" in the August issue of The Australian Journal). In that early period of cricket history as much importance was attached to style as to results, and it was considered bad form. to. be at all aggressive. To attempt to score off a straight ball was almost as unpardonable as to pull a slew long hop, and to jump out to hit slew bowling was a cardinal offence. It is on record that in 1847 a promising colt was dropped from the Sussex team because he left his crease to drive a slow bowler, missed the ball, and was stumped. The rash fellow did not get another trial. One of the authorities of the day, William Lillywhite, in his " Cricketers' Handbook," thus cautions batsmen against such recklessness: "If you once give way to running in to Wit, you will never make a safe and steady player. . . . Stepping in is a style that many have tried, though few have found it to answer. Never leave your ground to play at any ball." The cricketers of the period followed the advice of their mentors to such effect that in 1827 one Pierpoint, playing for Sussex against Kent at Lords, occupied the crease for 7i hours while he made 31 runs; wjh«le for the same team against the Rest of England in 1833 Morley took 3 hours to make 9. In the corresponding match five years later Napper put up an equally dashing performance, when he batted for 2 hours for 7, while the famous Edgar Wilsher, for Kent and Surrey versus the Rest of England in 1855, rattled up 20 in 4 hours.

An old cricket identity of the time, Jimimy Dean, coming out of Lord's ground, was asked how the match in progress was getting on. " Capitally," he said. " The first two batsmen 'ave been in 'arf an hour. They gets no runs, of course, but just as I left 'ls Lordship kicked a beautiful leg-bye." In those days the preparation of wic,kets was a thing Unknown, the stumps being pitched in any likely spot in the middle of the ground. '

Fuller Pilch, a noted batsman of the 'forties and 'fifties, when on tour with the famous All England eleven, always carried a scythe .in order personally to attend to the Wicket before the match started, in case a tuft or two of long grass mfght cramp his style. Pilch could be a fairly dogged player on occasions, as witness his effort for Kent against the Rest of England in 1851. He and W'enmjan were batting' while Clarke and Day bowled no fewer than 32 successive maiden overs.

The umpiring in those days was often open to question. In 1837, after a match between King's College and London University, it was discovered that the King's College team had the generous habit of paying the umpire double fees if they won the match !

BETTER THAN BLA'CKiHAM. ? GREAT SOUTH AFRICAN 'KEEPER.

'Waiting in the current issue of The Australian Journal, "Zulu" claimfc that P. W. Sher Well, captain and wicket-keeper of the South African teams that visited England in 1907 and Australia in 1911, was a better 'keeper than either Oldfield or Blackham. In the five test matches in 1911 Australia scored 3477 runs for 83 wickets, while Sherwell allowed only 35 byes in all. In addition to this, he stumped six batsmen and caught eight, his victims including Trumper, Bardsley, Gehrs, Kelleway, Hill, Armstrong, and Ransford. Sherwell's batting average in the tests was 20, and in addition he captained the team. Can Blackham, Oldfield, or anyone else produce a better performance than that ?