The World’s Greatest Cricketers

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLI, Issue 12, 16 September 1908, Page 13

The World’s Greatest Cricketers

By

SIR HOME GORDON, BART.

RANJITSINHJI. Up at Cambridge they used to call him “Smith,” and for some time it wm not realized how great a cricketer had arisen. Mr. F. S. Jackson, when captain of the University, would not even give him a trial. Nowadays there is something ludicrous in remembering how strongly prejudiced some of the older members of the M.C.0., notably AngloIndian, were against him. How many times have I not heard “there is something humiliating in an Indian coming over here and teaching us how to play cricket.” That, of course, is long past, but there can be no doubt that K. 8. Ranjitsinhji actually furnished us with a fresh revelation of batting. An habitual colleague has written so felicitously of him that quotation forma the aptest tribute. “His great fame as a batsman is due not only to his success as measured in runs, but also, and in chief, to the originality and peculiar charm of his style. There are many batsmen who make some one stroke with such wonderful ease and effect, that all their other strokes receive in comparison but scant appreciation. In Ranjitsinhji’s case every turn of his bat hae tins appearance of extreme facility) to such a degree indeed that his style seems almost casual and careless. The distinctive trait is an electrical quickness both in the conception and execution of his strokes.” How well can be remembered that wonderful hook of his, whilst his cutting has never been surpassed, and his celebrated leg-glances in reality were wristetrokes. Naturally he might be expected to bat his best on a hard ground under a hot sun, and yet, perhaps, the most marvellous of all his consummate displays was the one for England v. Australia at Manchester, in 1896, on a wicket on which no one else made twenty. He rose to a desperate occasion and contributed 154 in three hours, in a manner that was well-nigh incredible. “It is safe to say that a finer or more finished display has never been seen on a great occasion,” was the criticism of an expert. That the public should have taken him to their heart was not wonderful, for his gay pleasant manner, his unvarying good humour were as apparent as his glorious batting. To his friends he was hospitality personified, always ready to help, always ready to give way; bright, entertaining, and thoughtful for others. Luck long went against him so far as his position in the East goes, but the Rajah of Nawanagar may, after all, once more show us some of his skill. His future lies in the lap of the gods, his past as the perfection of batting forms an imperishable memory for all privileged to have witnessed his exhibitions. It is as impossible to deal with his great feats in this notice as to enumerate those of Dr. W. G. Grace. The great pair must ever be recalled in the most cursory history of cricket. Coming into the Sussex team, he there scored so superbly that is average is 65, for an aggrega.te of 17,062. To fall into statistics is as tempting as to eulogise when Ranjitsinhji is concerned. Let it be added he was a capital field, especially when nimbleness was needed. As a bowler he could claim that he generally obtained a wicket when he went on. Personally, having been singularly fortunate In witnessing an enormous amount of good cricket during the last twenty-seven years, I may be permitted to testify that I have derived more pleasure from watching Ranjitsinhji at the wicket than any other cricketer. HAYWARD. There is no professional batsman of to-<Bay comparable with Tom Hayward, On him has fallen the mantle of poor Arthur Shrewsbury. Which posterity will regard as the greater remains to ba seen. The Surrey champion la etill in the zenith of his powers. Indeed he seems to play with enhanced vigour—* a vigour which had it always been displayed would not have allowed him to acquire the nickname of “the GooseGamer.” On occasions where care was superfluous he has often carried care to an irritating extreme, because it was felt he could show much brighter batting if he chose. H 1» warmest admirers will not deny that more even than any other prominent crieketer he appears to play fog his average. He has often played a

great game, most notably of all a few years ago when Surrey seemed at the very worst of their luck, and it was his prowess that proved their mainstay. Still the subtle impression conveyed was that he was primarily playing his own game. Few men show quite their most natural form when scoring the last run of their coveted) century, but no one slows down more markedly In the nineties than Hayward. He was not quite so successful in 1907 as in the year before, though this could probably bo attributed to the wet season. However, with Hobbs he had the distinction of sharing in a feat never before accomplished in first-class cricket —that of sending up the 100 for the first wicket four times in the week. Mr Jephson was happy in his dictum when he wrote i “Watch Hayward as he stands at the wicket, a fine upstanding player, with a bat that never for a moment seems to deviate from the exact vertical — a great stylist in the best of sense of the word, with a curiously sound knowledge of defence.” To that let it be at once added that, like Dr. W. G. Grace, for him fast bowling presents no terrors. He simply wears it down and his back play on an overpitched ball is amazingly hard and accurate. His off-driving is beautiful, with a notable stroke over cover-point’s head, and at times he will jump out to slows with punishing effect. Tom Hayward is an instance of inherited talent, for ho is a son of Daniel Hayward, and namesake ondl nephew of that other Tom Hayward, who had the same repute forty years ago that “our Tom” has now. By birth a Cambridgeshireman he qualified without much hint being given of his great ability, yet he came out almost as good as ha is now. He has often been compared to William Barnes, and he shares with the once famous Notts, professional an intense dislike to bowling. An excellent bowler from the start with a quick break from the off, it almost seemed as if he purposely lost hie command over the ball for fear it should affect his increasing superiority with the bat. He makes a safe point, and was the right hand man and valued adviser of Lord Dalmeny, for he is sound in judgment and) quick in discerning weakness. Jt was he who appealed against King for twice hitting the ball. In England, in South Africa and in Australia, Hayward has been a fine specimen of the highest development of the modern British professional—a class that is an ornament to the game. It is curious to note that besides Hayward, Surrey has gained by residence, inter alia Baldwin, Beaumont, Bowley, Diver, Gooder, Hayes, Henderson, Lees, Lohmann, Lockwood, Marshall, Potter, Sharpe, F. E. and W. O. Smith, and Southerton, losing Braund, Bailey, Montgomery, Pearson, Mead of Hampshire, and Diver, whilst among amateurs the Oval team has gained Lord Dalmeny, but lost Messrs. H. W. Bainbridge, H. B. Chinnery, V. F. 8. Crawford, A. P. and R. N. and J. Douglas, O. M. J. Fox, C. B. Fry, A. P. Lueas, ami C. M. Wells, all an one period available, which maketii food for ponder. Hayward himself never plays to the gallery, and though on excellent terms with the scribes who write on the game, he is an advocate for silence on cricketers once they are oil the field, nor is he prone to give away his views. Next week: JACKSON, WOODS, LILLEY.