diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/52684-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/52684-0.txt | 14682 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 14682 deletions
diff --git a/old/52684-0.txt b/old/52684-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index aecca94..0000000 --- a/old/52684-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,14682 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's Cricket, by Allan Gibson Steel and Robert Henry Lyttelton - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Cricket - -Author: Allan Gibson Steel - Robert Henry Lyttelton - -Illustrator: Lucien Davis - -Release Date: July 31, 2016 [EBook #52684] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRICKET *** - - - - -Produced by MWS, Fay Dunn and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - - - - -Transcriber’s Note - - -In this text version of “Cricket”: Words in italics are marked with -_underscores_. Words in small capitals are shown in UPPER CASE. - -The three asterisks which mark the note at the end of Chapter I, -were originally printed as an inverted asterism. - -Full page figures have been moved near to the text they illustrate. -Figures in the text have been moved to the start or end of the -paragraph. - -In the ‘Likely balls’, and ‘Off breaks’ diagrams, the ball positions -are lettered from left to right. - -Footnotes have been moved to the end of chapters. - -Variant spelling and inconsistent hyphenation are retained, in a -few cases, missing punctuation has been added for consistency, e.g. -to match quotation marks. A few palpable printing errors have been -corrected. - -Other changes that have been made are listed at the end of the book. - - - - - The Badminton Library - - OF - - SPORTS AND PASTIMES - - EDITED BY - - HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF BEAUFORT, K.G. - - ASSISTED BY ALFRED E. T. WATSON - - _CRICKET_ - - - - -THE BADMINTON LIBRARY. - -28 Volumes. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. each volume. - - ARCHERY. By C. J. LONGMAN, Col. H. WALROND, &c. 195 Illustrations and - 2 Maps. - - ATHLETICS. By MONTAGUE SHEARMAN. 51 Illustrations. - - BIG GAME SHOOTING. By C. PHILLIPPS-WOLLEY, &c. - - - Vol. I.--AFRICA AND AMERICA. 77 Illustrations. Vol. II.--EUROPE, - ASIA, AND THE ARCTIC REGIONS. 73 Illustrations. - - BILLIARDS. By Major W. BROADFOOT, R.E. 29 Illustrations and numerous - Diagrams. - - COURSING AND FALCONRY. By HARDING COX and the Hon. GERALD LASCELLES. - 76 Illustrations. - - CRICKET. By A. G. STEEL and the Hon. R. H. LYTTELTON. 65 - Illustrations. - - CYCLING. By the Earl of ALBEMARLE and G. LACY HILLIER. 59 - Illustrations. - - DANCING. By Mrs. LILLY GROVE, F.R.G.S., &c. 131 Illustrations. - - DRIVING. By the Duke of BEAUFORT. 65 Illustrations. - - FENCING, BOXING, AND WRESTLING. By WALTER H. POLLOCK, F. C. GROVE, C. - PREVOST, &c. 42 Illustrations. - - FISHING. By H. CHOLMONDELEY-PENNELL. - - Vol. I.--SALMON, TROUT, and GRAYLING. 158 Illustrations. - - Vol. II.--PIKE and other COARSE FISH. 132 Illustrations. - - GOLF. By HORACE HUTCHINSON, the Right Hon. A. J. BALFOUR, M.P., &c. - 89 Illustrations. - - HUNTING. By the Duke of BEAUFORT, K.G., and MOWBRAY MORRIS. 53 - Illustrations. - - MOUNTAINEERING. By C. T. DENT, Sir W. M. CONWAY, &c. 108 - Illustrations. - - POETRY (THE) OF SPORT. Edited by HEDLEY PEEK. 106 Illustrations. - - RACING AND STEEPLECHASING. By the Earl of SUFFOLK AND BERKSHIRE, W. - G. CRAVEN, &c. 58 Illustrations. - - RIDING AND POLO. By ROBERT WEIR, J. MORAY BROWN, &c. 59 Illustrations. - - ROWING. By R. P. P. ROWE and C. M. PITMAN. With Chapters on Steering, - Metropolitan Rowing, and on PUNTING. With 75 Illustrations. - - SEA-FISHING. By JOHN BICKERDYKE, W. SENIOR, Sir H. W. GORE BOOTH, - Bart., and A. C. HARMSWORTH. 197 Illustrations. - - SHOOTING. By Lord WALSINGHAM and Sir RALPH PAYNE-GALLWEY, Bart. - - Vol. I.--FIELD AND COVERT. 105 Illustrations. - - Vol. II.--MOOR AND MARSH. 65 Illustrations. - - SKATING, CURLING, TOBOGGANING, &c. By J. M. HEATHCOTE, C. G. TEBBUTT, - &c. 284 Illustrations. - - SWIMMING. By ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR and WILLIAM HENRY. 119 Illustrations. - - TENNIS, LAWN TENNIS, RACKETS, AND FIVES. By J. M. and C. G. - HEATHCOTE, &c. 79 Illustrations. - - YACHTING. By Lord BRASSEY, the Earl of ONSLOW, &c. - - Vol. I.--CRUISING, CONSTRUCTION, RACING RULES, &c. 114 Illustrations. - - Vol. II.--YACHTING IN AMERICA AND THE COLONIES, RACING, &c. 195 - Illustrations. - - - - -LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO. 39 Paternoster Row, London and Bombay. - - - - -[Illustration: CAUGHT AND BOWLED] - - - - - CRICKET - - BY - A. G. STEEL - AND THE - HON. R. H. LYTTELTON - - WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY - A. LANG, W. G. GRACE, R. A. H. MITCHELL, AND F. GALE - - [Illustration: Roundel of Batsman waiting on bench] - - _WITH NUMEROUS ENGRAVINGS AFTER LUCIEN DAVIS - AND FROM PHOTOGRAPHS_ - - Sixth Edition, thoroughly revised - - LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. - 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON - AND BOMBAY - - 1898 - - _All rights reserved_ - - - - -_BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE._ - - -_First Edition, June 1888; Reprinted August 1888, January 1889, -September 1890. New Edition, thoroughly revised and with additions, -December 1893. New Edition, thoroughly revised and with additions, July -1898._ - - - - -_DEDICATION TO H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES._ - - - BADMINTON: _June, 1888_. - -Having received permission to dedicate these volumes, the BADMINTON -LIBRARY of SPORTS and PASTIMES, to HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE OF -WALES, I do so feeling that I am dedicating them to one of the best and -keenest sportsmen of our time. I can say, from personal observation, -that there is no man who can extricate himself from a bustling and -pushing crowd of horsemen, when a fox breaks covert, more dexterously -and quickly than His Royal Highness; and that when hounds run hard -over a big country, no man can take a line of his own and live with -them better. Also, when the wind has been blowing hard, often have I -seen His Royal Highness knocking over driven grouse and partridges and -high-rocketing pheasants in first-rate workmanlike style. He is held to -be a good yachtsman, and as Commodore of the Royal Yacht Squadron is -looked up to by those who love that pleasant and exhilarating pastime. -His encouragement of racing is well known, and his attendance at the -University, Public School, and other important Matches testifies to -his being, like most English gentlemen, fond of all manly sports. I -consider it a great privilege to be allowed to dedicate these volumes -to so eminent a sportsman as His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, -and I do so with sincere feelings of respect and esteem and loyal -devotion. - - BEAUFORT. - - - - -[Illustration: BADMINTON.] - - - - -PREFACE. - - -A few lines only are necessary to explain the object with which these -volumes are put forth. There is no modern encyclopædia to which the -inexperienced man, who seeks guidance in the practice of the various -British Sports and Pastimes, can turn for information. Some books there -are on Hunting, some on Racing, some on Lawn Tennis, some on Fishing, -and so on; but one Library, or succession of volumes, which treats -of the Sports and Pastimes indulged in by Englishmen--and women--is -wanting. The Badminton Library is offered to supply the want. Of the -imperfections which must be found in the execution of such a design we -are conscious. Experts often differ. But this we may say, that those -who are seeking for knowledge on any of the subjects dealt with will -find the results of many years’ experience written by men who are in -every case adepts at the Sport or Pastime of which they write. It is to -point the way to success to those who are ignorant of the sciences they -aspire to master, and who have no friend to help or coach them, that -these volumes are written. - -To those who have worked hard to place simply and clearly before the -reader that which he will find within, the best thanks of the Editor -are due. That it has been no slight labour to supervise all that -has been written he must acknowledge; but it has been a labour of -love, and very much lightened by the courtesy of the Publisher, by -the unflinching, indefatigable assistance of the Sub-Editor, and by -the intelligent and able arrangement of each subject by the various -writers, who are so thoroughly masters of the subjects of which they -treat. The reward we all hope to reap is that our work may prove useful -to this and future generations. - - THE EDITOR. - - - - -CONTENTS. - - - CHAPTER PAGE - I. THE HISTORY OF CRICKET 1 - _By Andrew Lang._ - - II. BATTING 34 - _By the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton._ - - III. BOWLING 94 - _By A. G. Steel._ - - IV. CAPTAINCY 187 - _By A. G. Steel._ - - V. UMPIRES 217 - _By A. G. Steel._ - - VI. FIELDING 245 - _By the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton._ - - VII. COUNTRY CRICKET 280 - _By F. Gale._ - - VIII. BORDER CRICKET 292 - _By Andrew Lang._ - - IX. HOW TO SCORE 299 - _By W. G. Grace._ - - X. THE AUSTRALIANS 313 - _By A. G. Steel._ - - XI. THE UNIVERSITY CRICKET MATCH 328 - _By the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton._ - - XII. GENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS 356 - _By the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton._ - - XIII. THE ART OF TRAINING YOUNG CRICKETERS 375 - _By R. A. H. Mitchell._ - - XIV. SINGLE WICKET 386 - _By the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton._ - - - INDEX 395 - - - - -_ILLUSTRATIONS._ - - (ENGRAVED BY J. D. COOPER AND R. B. LODGE, AFTER DRAWINGS BY LUCIEN - DAVIS, AND PHOTOGRAPHS BY G. MITCHELL, MARTIN & TYLER, AND - MEDRINGTON & CO.) - - -FULL-PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS. - - ARTIST - - CAUGHT AND BOWLED _Lucien Davis_ _Frontispiece_ - - {_From a picture ascribed_ } - A YOUNG CRICKETER { _to Gainsborough,_ } _To face p._ 1 - { _belonging to the M.C.C._} - - CRICKET {_After Hayman’s picture,_ } ″ 12 - { _belonging to M.C.C._ } - ROYAL ACADEMY CLUB IN } - MARYLEBONE FIELDS } ″ ″ ″ 28 - - CAUGHT AT THE WICKET _Lucien Davis_ ″ 68 - RUN OUT ″ ″ 198 - - A. E. STODDART _From a photograph_ ″ 212 - - COUNTRY CRICKET _Lucien Davis_ ″ 280 - (_Mitcham_) - - M.C.C. AND GROUND _v._ } - AUSTRALIANS, LORD’S, } ″ ″ 308 - MAY 22, 1884 } - - THE CRITICS ″ ″ 324 - - THE INTERVAL ″ ″ 348 - - KENNINGTON OVAL, 1854 ″ 366 - - OUR NATIONAL GAME _Lucien Davis_ ″ 376 - - -ILLUSTRATIONS IN TEXT. - - ARTIST PAGE - _Vignette on Title-page_ _Lucien Davis_ - - ‘MISS WICKET’ { _From an old print,_ } 7 - { _1770_ } - - THE CHAMPION _Lucien Davis_ 34 - - W. G. GRACE READY TO RECEIVE THE } ″ 44 - BALL } - - FORWARD PLAY _From a photograph_ 50 - - ‘HALF-COCK,’ OR OVER THE CREASE PLAY ″ 52 - - ‘BACK-PLAY’ TO A BUMPING BALL ″ 55 - - GUNN CUTTING ″ 59 - - SHREWSBURY CUTTING ″ 60 - - OLD-FASHIONED SWEEP TO LEG (GUNN) ″ 62 - - SQUARE-LEG HIT (W. G. GRACE) ″ 64 - - ‘THE GLIDE’ (W. G. GRACE) ″ 66 - - FORCING STROKE OFF THE LEGS ″ 68 - - OFF DRIVE ″ 70 - - RUNNING OUT TO DRIVE (SHREWSBURY) ″ 77 - - GUNN PLAYING FORWARD ″ 93 - - ‘THE DEMON BOWLER’ _Lucien Davis_ 94 - - THE LEG-BREAK DIAGRAM 110 - - POSITION OF FIELD IF BOWLING ON LEG } 111 - SIDE } - - THE LEG-BREAK _From a photograph_ 113 - - LIKELY BALLS; AND WHAT MAY BECOME } 114 - OF THEM IF NOT CORRECTLY PLAYED } - - THE OFF BREAK _From a photograph_ 116 - - ‘OFF BREAKS’ 117 - - SLOW BALL 123 - - FAST BALL 123 - - A HOT RETURN _From a photograph_ 127 - - A POKEY BATSMAN DEALING WITH A } _From a photograph_ 139 - HIGH-DROPPING FULL-PITCH } - - LOW DELIVERY ″ 167 - - DOUBTFUL DELIVERY ″ 174 - - THE FIELD FOR A FAST RIGHT-ARM } 176 - BOWLER } - - THE FIELD FOR A FAST LEFT-ARM BOWLER 177 - - GOING IN _Lucien Davis_ 187 - - ETON _v._ HARROW ″ 208 - - AT WICKET AFTER BOWLING _From a photograph_ 214 - - ‘GUARD, PLEASE, UMPIRE’ _Lucien Davis_ 217 - - A CLEAR CASE _From a photograph_ 224 - - ‘YOU MUST GO, JACK’ ″ 229 - - STUMPED _Lucien Davis_ 243 - - ‘SAVING THE FOUR’ ″ 245 - - BACKING UP ″ 247 - - ‘OVERTAKING AND PICKING UP’ _From a photograph_ 249 - - THE RIGHT WAY TO CATCH ″ 250 - - THE WRONG WAY TO CATCH ″ 251 - - WICKET-KEEPER--SHERWIN IN POSITION ″ 252 - - WICKET-KEEPER--ANOTHER POSITION ″ 254 - - HIT TO SQUARE-LEG _Lucien Davis_ 256 - - POINT _From a photograph_ 261 - - SHORT-SLIP ″ 264 - - THE WRONG POSITION FOR STOPPING THE } ″ 273 - BALL } - - AN ANXIOUS MOMENT _Lucien Davis_ 279 - - A SIX-YEAR OLD _From a photograph_ 375 - - DRAWING AWAY FROM THE WICKET _Lucien Davis_ 379 - - - - -[Illustration: A YOUNG CRICKETER - -(_From a Picture ascribed to Gainsborough belonging to the M.C.C._)] - - - - -CRICKET. - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -THE HISTORY OF CRICKET. - -(BY ANDREW LANG.) - -_Archæology of the Game._ - - -Hundreds of pages have been written on the origin and early history of -Cricket. The Egyptian monuments and Holy Scriptures, the illuminated -books of the Middle Ages, and the terra-cottas and vases of Greece -have been studied, to no practical purpose, by historians of the game. -Outside of England,[1] and before the fortieth year of the reign -of Elizabeth, there are no documents for the existence of cricket. -Doubtless in rudimentary and embryonic forms, it may have existed. Of -those forms we still possess a few, as ‘rounders’ and ‘stool-ball,’ and -we can also study degraded shapes of cricket, which naturally revert to -the early germs of the pastime as degenerate human types throw back to -the monkey. There is a sport known at some schools as ‘stump-cricket,’ -‘snob-cricket,’ or (mysteriously and locally) as ‘Dex,’[2] which is -a degenerate shape of the game, and which is probably very like the -rudimentary shapes. These degradations are reversals or returns to -primitive forms. - -A ball, more or less light and soft, is bowled or tossed at any fixed -object, which, in turn, is defended by a player armed with a stick, -stump, hair-brush, or other instrument. The player counts as many -points as he can run backwards and forwards, after hitting the ball, -between the object he defends and some more or less distant goal, -before the ball is returned. He loses his position when the object -he defends is struck by the ball, or when the ball is caught, after -he has hit it, before touching the ground. Such is the degraded form -of cricket, and such, apparently, was its earliest shape. Ancient -surviving forms in which a similar principle exists are ‘rounders’ -and ‘stool-ball.’ The former has been developed in America into the -scientific game of ‘base-ball,’ the name being Old English, while the -scientific perfection is American. It is impossible to trace cricket -farther back than games in which points are scored in proportion to -the amount of ground that the hitter can cover before the return of -the struck ball. Now other forms of ball-play, as tennis, in different -guises, can be found even among the ancient Aztecs,[3] while the Red -Indians practised the form which is hockey among us, and the French and -Walloons have sports very closely corresponding to golf; but games with -the slightest analogy to cricket are very rare. Stool-ball is the most -important foreshadowing of cricket. As early as 1614, Chapman, in his -translation of the sixth book of the ‘Odyssey,’ makes Nausicaa and her -girls play stool-ball. Chapman gives certain technical terms, which, -of course, have nothing corresponding to them in Homer, but which are -valuable illustrations of the English game. - -Nausicaa seems to have received a trial ball-- - - Nausicaa, with the wrists of ivory, - The _liking-stroke_ struck. - -Again, - - The Queen now, for the upstroke, struck the ball - Quite _wide_ of th’ other maids, and made it fall - Amidst the whirlpools. - -thereby, doubtless, scoring a lost ball. He describes this as ‘a -stool-ball chance.’ Chapman does not say whether the ball was bowled to -Nausicaa. Everything shows that Dr. Johnson was writing at random when -he described stool-ball as a game ‘in which a ball is driven from stool -to stool.’ Chapman conceives Nausicaa as making a ‘boundary hit.’ There -would be no need of such hitting if balls were only ‘driven from stool -to stool.’ - -Strutt’s remarks on stool-ball merely show that he did not appreciate -the importance of the game as an early form of cricket. ‘I have been -informed,’ he says, ‘that a pastime called stool-ball is practised to -this day in the northern parts of England, which consists simply in -setting a stool upon the ground, and one of the players takes his place -before it, while his antagonist, standing at a distance, tosses a ball -with the intention of striking the stool, and this it is the business -of the former to prevent by beating it away with his hand, reckoning -one to the game for every stroke of the ball,’ apparently without -running. ‘If, on the contrary, it should be missed by the hand and -strike the stool, the players change places.’ Strutt adds, in a note, -that he believes the player may be caught out. He describes another -game in which stools are set as ‘bases’ in a kind of base-ball. He -makes the usual quotations from Durfey about ‘a match for kisses at -stool-ball to play.’[4] - -Brand’s notes on stool-ball do no more than show that men and women -played for small wagers, as in Herrick, - - At stool-ball, Lucia, let us play - For sugar, cakes, and wine.[5] - -It is plain enough that stool-ball was a game for girls, or for boys -and girls, and Herrick and Lucia. As at present played stool-ball is -a woman’s game; but no stool is used: what answers to the wicket is a -square board at a certain height on a pole, much as if one bowled at -the telegraph instead of the stumps. Consequently, as at base-ball, -only full pitches can be tossed. However, in stool-ball we recognise -the unconscious beginnings of better things. As much may be said for -‘cat-and-dog.’ This may be regarded either as a degraded attempt at -early cricket, played by economists who could not afford a ball, or -as a natural _volks-kriket_, dating from a period of culture in which -balls had not yet been invented. The archæologist will prefer the -latter explanation, but we would not pedantically insist on either -alternative. In Jamieson’s ‘Scotch Dictionary,’[6] cat-and-dog is -described as a game for three.[7] Two holes are cut at a distance of -thirteen yards. At each hole stands a player with a club, called a -‘dog.’ A piece of wood,[8] four inches long by one in circumference, -is tossed, in place of a ball, to one of the dogsmen. His object is to -keep the cat out of the hole. ‘If the cat be struck, he who strikes it -changes places with the person who holds the other club, and as often -as the positions are changed one is counted as won in the game by the -two who hold the clubs.’ Jamieson says this is an ‘ancient sport in -Angus and Lauder.’ A man was bowled when the cat got into the hole he -defended. We hear nothing of ‘caught and bowled.’[9] - -Cat-and-dog, or, more briefly, cat, was a favourite game with John -Bunyan. He was playing when a voice from heaven (as he imagined) -suddenly darted into his soul, with some warning remarks, as he was -‘about to strike the cat from the hole.’ The cat, here, seems to have -been quiescent. ‘Leaving my cat on the ground, I looked up to Heaven,’ -and beheld a vision. Let it be remembered that Bunyan was playing on -Sunday. The game of cat, as known to him, was, apparently, rather a -rude variety of knurr and spell than of cricket. This form is mentioned -by Strutt.[10] Both stool-ball and cat-and-dog have closer affinities -with cricket than club-ball as represented in Strutt’s authorities.[11] -Perhaps we may say that wherever stool-ball was played, or cat-and-dog, -there cricket was potentially present. As to the derivation of the word -‘cricket,’ philologists differ as much as usual. Certainly ‘cricket’ -is an old word for a stool, though in this sense it does not occur -in Skeat.[12] In Todd’s ‘Johnson,’ we find, ‘Cricket: a low seat or -stool, from German _kriechen_, to creep.’ In Scotland we talk of a -‘creepy-stool.’ - - It’s a wise wife that kens her weird, - What though ye mount the creepy! - -says Allan Ramsay, meaning the stool of repentance. If, then, -stool-ball be the origin of cricket, and if a cricket be a stool, -‘cricket’ may be merely a synonym for stool-ball. Todd’s ‘Johnson,’ -with ignominious ignorance, styles cricket ‘a sport in which the -contenders drive a ball with sticks or bats in opposition to each -other.’ Johnson must have known better. In the ‘Rambler,’ No. 30, he -writes, ‘Sometimes an unlucky boy will drive his cricket-ball full in -my face.’ Observe, he says ‘drive,’ not ‘cut,’ nor ‘hit to leg.’ - -Professor Skeat says nothing of this derivation of ‘cricket’ from -cricket, a stool. He thinks ‘et’ may be a diminutive, added to the -Anglo-Saxon _cricc_, a staff. If that be so, cricket will mean -club-play rather than stool-ball. In any case, Professor Skeat has a -valuable quotation of ‘cricket’ from the French and English Dictionary -compiled in 1611, by Mr. Randle Cotgrave. He translates the French -_crosse_, ‘a crosier, or bishop’s staffe, also a _cricket staffe_, -or the crooked staffe wherewith boies play at cricket.’ Now the name -of the club used in French Flanders at the local kind of golf is _la -crosse_. It is a heavy, barbaric kind of golf-club.[13] - -Thanks to Cotgrave, then, we know that in 1611 cricket was a boy’s -game, played with a crooked staff. The club, bat, or staff continued -to be crooked or curved at the blade till the middle of the eighteenth -century or later; and till nearly 1720 cricket was mainly a game for -boys. We may now examine the authorities for the earliest mentions of -cricket. - -People have often regarded Florio’s expression in his Italian -Dictionary (1598) _cricket-a-wicket_ as the first mention of the noble -game. It were strange indeed if this great word first dropped from -the pen of an Italian! The quotation is ‘_sgrittare_, to make a noise -as a cricket; to play _cricket-a-wicket_, and be merry.’ I have no -doubt myself that this is a mere coincidence of sound. The cricket -(on the hearth) is a merry little beast, or has that reputation. The -term ‘cricket-a-wicket’ is a mere rhyming reduplication of sounds like -‘hob-nob’ or ‘tooral-ooral,’ or the older ‘Torelore,’ the name of a -mythical country in a French romance of the twelfth century. It is -an odd coincidence, no doubt, that the rhyming reduplication should -associate wicket with cricket. But, for all that, ‘cricket-a-wicket’ -must pair off with ‘helter-skelter,’ ‘higgledy-piggledy,’ and -_Tarabara_ to which Florio gives cricket-a-wicket as an equivalent.[14] - -[Illustration: ‘Miss Wicket.’ (From an old print, 1770.)] - -Yet cricket was played in England, by boys at least, in Florio’s -time. The proof of this exists, or existed, in the ‘Constitution -Book of Guildford,’ a manuscript collection of records once in the -possession of that town. In the ‘History of Guildford,’ an anonymous -compilation, published by Russell in the Surrey town, and by Longmans -in London (1801), there are extracts from the ‘Constitution Book.’ -They begin with a grant _anno_ li. Ed. III. For our purpose the only -important passages are pp. 201, 202. In the thirty-fifth year of -Elizabeth one William Wyntersmoll withheld a piece of common land, -to the extent of one acre, from the town. Forty years before, John -Parvishe had obtained leave to make a temporary enclosure there, -and the enclosure had never been removed. In the fortieth year of -Elizabeth this acre was still in dispute, when John Derrick, gent, aged -fifty-nine, one of the Queen’s Coroners for the county, gave evidence -that he ‘knew it fifty years ago or more. It lay waste and was used -and occupyed by the inhabitants of Guildeford to saw timber in and for -saw-pitts.... When he was a scholler in the free school of Guildeford -he and several of his fellowes did run and play there at crickett and -other plaies.’ - -This is the oldest certain authority for cricket with which I am -acquainted. Clearly it was a boy’s game in the early years of -Elizabeth. Nor was it a very scientific game if it could be played on -a wicket agreeably diversified by ‘saw-pitts.’ William Page may have -played cricket at Eton and learned to bat as well as ‘to hick and hack, -which they will do fast enough of themselves, and to cry _horum_.’ It -has already been shown that, in 1611, ‘boyes played at crickett,’ with -a crooked bat or ‘cricket-staffe.’ - -In 1676 we get a view of a summer day at Aleppo, and of British sailors -busy at the national game. - -Henry Teonge, Chaplain on board H.M.S. ships ‘Assistance,’ ‘Bristol,’ -and ‘Royal Oak,’ Anno 1675 to 1679, writes:-- - - [At Aleppo]. - - 6.--This morning early (as it is the custom all summer longe) at the - least 40 of the English, with his worship the Consull, rod out of the - cytty about 4 miles to the Greene Platt, a fine vally by a river syde, - to recreate them selves. Where a princely tent was pitched; and wee - had severall pastimes and sports, as duck-hunting, fishing, shooting, - handball, krickett, scrofilo; and then a noble dinner brought thither, - with greate plenty of all sorts of wine, punch, and lemonads; and at 6 - wee returne all home in good order, but soundly tyred and weary.[15] - -When once the eighteenth century is reached cricket begins to find -mention in literature. Clearly the game was rising in the world and -was being taken up, like the poets of the period, by patrons. Lord -Chesterfield, whom Dr. Johnson found a patron so insufficient, talked -about cricket in a very proper spirit in 1740.[16] ‘If you have a right -ambition you will desire to excell all boys of your age at cricket -... as well as in learning.’ That is the right style of fatherly -counsel; but Philip Stanhope never came to ‘European reputation as -mid-wicket-on,’ like a hero of Mr. James Payn’s. Lord Chesterfield -also alludes to ‘your various occupations of Greek and cricket, Latin -and pitch-farthing,’ very justly coupling the nobler language with the -nobler game. Already in the fourth book of the ‘Dunciad,’ line 592, Mr. -Alexander Pope had sneered at cricket.[17] At what did Mr. Pope not -sneer? The fair, the wise, the manly,--Mrs. Arabella Fermor, Lady Mary -Wortley Montagu, Mr. Colley Cibber, and a delightful pastime,--he turns -up his nose at them and at everyone and everything! - - _O le grand homme, rien ne lui peut plaire!_ - -See, he cries to Dulness, see-- - - The judge to dance his brother serjeant call, - The senator at cricket urge the ball. - -Cricket was played at Eton early. Gray, writing to West, says, -‘There is my Lords Sandwich and Halifax--they are statesmen--do you -not remember them dirty boys playing at cricket?’[18] In 1736 Walpole -writes, ‘I can’t say I am sorry I was never quite a school-boy: an -expedition against bargemen, or a match at cricket may be very pretty -things to recollect; but, thank my stars, I can remember things very -near as pretty.’[19] The bargee might have found an interview with Miss -Horace pretty to recollect, but when Horace pretends that he might have -been in the Eleven if he liked, the absurdity becomes too glaring. We -are reminded of Charles Lamb’s ‘Here is Wordsworth saying he might -have written “Hamlet” if he had had the “mind.”’ Cowper pretends (in -1781) that ‘as a boy I excelled at cricket and football,’ but he adds, -with perfect truth, ‘the fame I acquired by achievements that way is -long since forgotten.’ The author of the ‘Task,’ and of a good many -hymns, was no Mynn nor Grace. We shall find but few of the English -poets distinguished as cricketers, or fond of tuning the lyre to sing -Pindaric strains of batters and bowlers. Byron tells a friend how -they ‘together joined in cricket’s manly toil’ (1807). Another noble -exception is George Huddesford,[20] author of ‘Salmagundi’ (1791, p. -66)-- - - But come, thou genial son of spring - Whitsuntide, and with thee bring - _Cricket_, nimble boy and light, - In slippers red and drawers white, - Who o’er the nicely measured land - Ranges around his comely band, - Alert to intercept each blow, - Each motion of the wary foe. - -This passage gives us the costume--white drawers and red slippers. The -contemporary works of art, whereof see a little gallery on the walls -of the pavilion at Lord’s, show that men when they played also wore -a kind of jockey cap. In a sketch of the Arms of Shrewsbury School, -little boys are playing; the bat is a kind of hockey-stick as in the -preceding century. There are only two stumps, nor more in Hayman’s -well-known picture engraved 1755. The fields are well set for the -bowling, and are represented with their hands ready for a catch. There -are umpires in their usual places; the scores are kept by men who cut -notches in tally-sticks. Such ‘notches’ were ‘got’ by ‘Miss Wicket’ a -sportive young lady in a somewhat later caricature (p. 7). The ball -(1770) has heavy cross-seams. But a silver ball, about a hundred years -old, used as a snuff-box by the Vine Club at Sevenoaks, is marked with -seams like those of to-day. Miss Wicket, also, carries a curved bat, -but it has developed beyond the rustic crooked stick, and more nearly -resembles some of the old curved bats at Lord’s, with which a strong -man must have hit prodigious skyers. We may doubt if bats were ever -such ‘three-man beetles’ as the players in an undated but contemporary -picture at Lord’s do fillip withal. The fields, in this curious -piece, are all in a line at square-leg, and disappear in a distance -unconscious of perspective. - -[Illustration: After a Picture by Hayman, R.A., belonging to the M.C.C.] - -Cricket had even before this date reached that height of prosperity -which provokes the attention of moralists. ‘Here is a fine morning: -let us go and put down some form of enjoyment,’ says the moralist. In -1743 a writer in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ was moved to allege that -‘the exercise may be strained too far.... Cricket is certainly a very -good and wholesome exercise, yet it may be abused if either great or -little people make it their business.’ The chief complaint is that -great and little people play together--butchers and baronets. Cricket -‘propagates a spirit of idleness at the very time when, with the -utmost industry, our debts, taxes, and decay of trade will scarcely -allow us to get bread.’ The Lydians, according to Herodotus, invented -games to make them forget the scarcity of bread. But the gentleman in -the magazine is much more austere than Herodotus. ‘The advertisements -most impudently recite that great sums are laid’; and it was, indeed, -customary to announce a match for 500_l._ or 1,000_l._ Whether these -sums were not drawn on Fancy’s exchequer, at least in many cases, we -may reasonably doubt. In his ‘English Game of Cricket’ (p. 138) the -learned Mr. Box quotes a tale of betting in 1711, from a document which -he does not describe. It appears that in 1711 the county of Kent played -All England, and money was lost and won, and there was a law-suit to -recover. The court said, ‘Cricket is, to be sure, a manly game and not -bad in itself, but it is the ill-use that is made of it by betting -above 10_l._ on it that is bad.’ To a humble fiver on the University -match this court would have had no kind of objection to make. The -history of betting at cricket is given by Mr. Pycroft in the ‘Cricket -Field’ (chap. vi.). A most interesting chapter it is. - -The earliest laws of the game, or at least the earliest which have -reached us, are of the year 1774. A committee of noblemen and gentlemen -(including Sir Horace Mann, the Duke of Dorset, and Lord Tankerville) -drew them up at the ‘Star and Garter’ in Pall Mall. ‘The pitching of -the first wicket is to be determined by the toss of a piece of money.’ -Does this mean that the sides tossed for which was to pitch the wicket? -As Nyren shows, much turned on the pitching of the wicket. Lumpy -(Stevens) ‘would invariably choose the ground where his balls would -shoot.’[21] In the rules of 1774, the distance between the stumps is -the same as at present. The crease is cut, not painted.[22] The stumps -are twenty-two inches in height; there is only one bail, of six inches -in length. ‘No ball,’ as far as crossing the crease goes, is just like -‘no ball’ to-day. Indeed, the game was essentially the game of to-day, -except that if a ball were hit ‘the other player may place his body -anywhere within the swing of his bat, so as to hinder the bowler from -catching her, but he must neither strike at her nor touch her with his -hands.’ - -At this moment of legislation, when the dim heroic age of cricket -begins to broaden into the boundless day of history, Mr. James Love, -comedian, appeared as the epic poet of the sport.[23] His quarto is -dedicated to the Richmond Club, and is inspired ‘by a recollection of -many Particulars at a time when the Game was cultivated with the utmost -Assiduity, and patronised by the personal Appearance[24] and Management -of some of the most capital People in the Kingdom.’ Mr. Love, in his -enthusiasm, publishes an exhortation to Britain, to leave all meaner -sports, and cultivate cricket only. - - Hail CRICKET, glorious, manly, _British_ game, - First of all sports, be first alike in fame, - -sings Love, as he warms to his work. He denounces ‘puny Billiards,’ -played by ‘Beaus, dressed in the quintessence of the fashion. -The robust _Cricketer_ plays in his shirt, the Rev. Mr. W----d, -particularly, appears almost naked.’ - -One line of Mr. Love’s, - - _Where fainting vice calls folly to her aid_, - -appears to him so excellent that he thinks it must be plagiarised, and, -in a note, invites the learned reader to find out where he stole it -from. To this a critic, Britannicus Severus, answers that ‘Gentlemen -who have CRICKET in their heads cannot afford to pore over a parcel of -musty Authors.’ Indeed, your cricketer is rarely a bookworm. - - ‘Leave the dissolving song, the baby dance, - To soothe the slaves of Italy and France, - -and play up,’ cries this English bard. - -In the second book, the poet comes to business--Kent _v._ All England. -The poet, after the custom of his age, gives dashes after an initial, -in place of names. In notes he interprets his dashes, and introduces -us to Newland, of Slendon, in Sussex, a farmer, and a famous batsman; -Bryan, of London, bricklayer; Rumney, gardener to the Duke of Dorset; -Smith, keeper of the artillery ground; Hodswell, the bowling tanner of -Dartford; Mills, of Bromley; Robin, commonly called Long Robin; Mills, -Sawyer, Cutbush, Bartrum, Kips, and Danes; Cuddy, the tailor; Derigate, -of Reigate; Weymark, the miller, with Newland, Green, two Harrises, and -Smith made up the teams. The match is summed up in the Argument of the -Third Book. - - _The Game._--Five on the side of the Counties are out for three - Notches. The Odds run high on the side of Kent. Bryan and Newland go - in; they help the Game greatly. Bryan is unfortunately put out by - Kips. Kent, the First Innings, is Thirteen ahead. The Counties go in - again, and get Fifty-seven ahead. Kent, in the Second Innings, is very - near losing, the two last Men being in. Weymark unhappily misses a - Catch, and by that means Kent is victorious. - -It was a splendid close match--but let us pity Weymark, immortal -butter-fingers. In the first innings the wicket-keeping of Kips to the -fast bowling of Hodswell was reckoned fine. - -If Love was the Homer of cricket, the minstrel who won from -forgetfulness the glories of the dim Heroic Age, Nyren, was the -delightful Herodotus of the early Historic Period. John Nyren dedicated -his ‘Cricketer’s Guide and Recollections of the Cricketers of my Time,’ -to the great Mr. William Ward, in 1833. He speaks of cricket as ‘an -elegant relaxation,’ and congratulates Mr. Ward on ‘having gained the -_longest hands_ of any player upon record.’ This famed score was made -on July 24, 25, 1820, on the M.C.C. ground. The number was 278, ‘108 -more than any player ever gained;’ Aylward’s 167 had previously been -the longest score I know. Mr. Ward’s feat, moreover, was ‘after the -increase of the stumps in 1817.’ Old Nyren was charmed in his declining -hours by a deed like this, yet grieved by the modern bowlers, and their -habit ‘of throwing the ball.’ The history of that innovation will -presently be sketched. - -Nyren was born at Hambledon, in Hampshire, on December 15, 1764, and -was therefore a small boy when Love sang. He died at Bromley, June 28, -1837. Like most very great men, he was possibly of Scottish blood. He -was a Catholic and believed that the true spelling of the family name -was Nairne, and that they came south after being ‘out in the ’15 or -’45.’ Mr. Charles Cowden Clarke describes him as a thoroughly good and -amiable man, and as much may be guessed from his writings. - -Mr. Clarke agreed with him in his dislike of round-hand bowling, save -when Lillywhite was pitted against Fuller Pilch--a beautiful thing to -see, as the Bishop of St. Andrews testifies, ‘speaking,’ like Dares -Phrygius of the heroes at Troy, ‘as he that saw them.’ In Nyren’s -youth--say 1780--Hambledon was the centre of cricket. The boy had a -cricketing education. He learned a little Latin of a worthy old Jesuit, -but was a better hand at the fiddle. In that musical old England, where -John Small, the noted bat, once charmed an infuriated bull by his -minstrelsy, Nyren performed a moral miracle. He played to the gipsies, -and so won their hearts that they always passed by his hen-roost when -they robbed the neighbours. Music and cricket were the Hambledon man’s -delight. His father, Richard Nyren, was, with Thomas Brett, one of the -chief bowlers. Brett was ‘the fastest as well as straightest bowler -that was ever known’; no _jerker_, but with a very high delivery. -The height of the delivery was not _à la Spofforth_, but was got by -sending the ball out from under the armpit. How this manœuvre could -be combined with pace is a great mystery. Richard Nyren had this art, -‘always to the length.’ Brett’s bowling is described as ‘tremendous,’ -yet Tom Sueter could stump off it--Tom of the honourable heart, and the -voice so sweet, pure and powerful. Yet on those wickets Tom needed a -long-stop to Brett--George Lear. The Bishop has seen three long-stops -on to Brown; ‘but he _was_ a jerker.’ At that date the long-stop -commonly dropped on one knee as he received the ball. An old Eton boy, -G. B., who was at school between 1805 and 1814, says, in a letter to -the _Standard_ (dated September 21, 1886), that ‘a pocket-handkerchief -was allowed round the dropping knee of long-stop.’ A bowler with a low -delivery was Lambert, ‘the little farmer.’ ‘His ball would twist from -the off stump into the leg. _He was the first I remember who introduced -this deceitful and teasing way of delivering the ball._’ Cricket was -indeed rudimentary when a break from the off was a new thing. ‘The -Kent and Surrey men could not tell what to make of that cursed twist -of his.’ Lambert acquired the art as Daphnis learned his minstrelsy, -while he tended his father’s sheep. He would set up hurdles instead of -a net and bowl for hours. But it needed old Nyren to teach him to bowl -outside the off stump, so little alert was the mind of this innovator. -Among outsiders, Lumpy, the Surrey man, was the most accurate ‘to a -length,’ and he was much faster than Lord Frederick Beauclerk. In these -days the home bowlers pitched the wickets to suit themselves. Thus they -had all the advantage of rough wickets on a slope; yet, even so, a -yokel with pluck and ‘an arm as long as a hop-pole,’ has been known to -slash Lumpy all over the field. But this could only have been done at -single wicket. A curious bowler of this age was Noah Mann, the fleetest -runner of his time, and a skilled horseman. He was a left-handed -bowler, and, as will be seen, he anticipated the magical ‘pitching’ -of experts at base-ball. How he did this without throwing or jerking -is hard to be understood. ‘His merit consisted in giving a curve to -the ball the whole way. In itself it was not the first-rate style -of bowling, but so very deceptive that the chief end was frequently -attained. They who remember the dexterous manner with which the Indian -jugglers communicated the curve to the balls they spun round their -heads by a twist of the wrist or hand will at once comprehend Noah’s -curious feat in bowling.’ He once made a hit for ten at Windmill-down, -to which the club moved from the bleakness of Broadhalfpenny. - -We have followed Nyren’s comments on bowlers for the purpose of -elucidating the evolution of their ingenious art. All the bowlers, -so far, have been under-hand, but now we hear of ‘these anointed -clod-stumpers’ the Walkers. They were not of Broadhalfpenny, but -joined the club at Windmill-down, when the move there was made on -the suggestion of the Duke of Dorset. ‘About a couple of years after -Walker had been with us’ (probably about 1790), ‘he began the system -of throwing instead of bowling, now so much the fashion.’ He was -no-balled, after a council of the Hambledon Club, called for the -purpose. This disposes of the priority of Mr. Willes (1807), and -incidentally casts doubt on the myth that a lady invented round-hand -bowling. Nyren says, ‘The first I recollect seeing _revive_ the custom -was Wills, a Sussex man.’ - -From the heresiarch, Tom Walker, we come to the classic model of a -bowler in the under-hand school--that excellent man, christian and -cricketer, David Harris. - - It would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to convey in writing an - accurate idea of the grand effect of Harris’s bowling; they only who - have played against him can fully appreciate it. His attitude, when - preparing for his run previously to delivering the ball, would have - made a beautiful study for the sculptor. Phidias would certainly have - taken him for a model. First of all, he stood erect like a soldier - at drill; then, with a graceful curve of the arm, he raised the ball - to his forehead, and drawing back his right foot, started off with - his left. The calm look and general air of the man were uncommonly - striking, and from this series of preparations he never deviated. I am - sure that from this simple account of his manner, all my countrymen - who were acquainted with his play will recall him to their minds. His - mode of delivering the ball was very singular. He would bring it from - under the arm by a twist, and nearly as high as his arm-pit, and with - this action _push_ it, as it were, from him. How it was that the balls - acquired the velocity they did by this mode of delivery, I never could - comprehend. - - When first he joined the Hambledon Club, he was quite a raw - countryman at cricket, and had very little to recommend him but his - noble delivery. He was also very apt to give tosses. I have seen old - Nyren scratch his head, and say,--‘Harris would make the best bowler - in England if he did not toss.’ By continual practice, however, and - following the advice of the old Hambledon players, he became as steady - as could be wished; and in the prime of his playing very rarely - indeed gave a toss, although his balls were pitched the full length. - In bowling, he never stooped in the least in his delivery, but kept - himself upright all the time. His balls were very little beholden to - the ground when pitched; it was but a touch, and up again; and woe - be to the man who did not get in to block them, for they had such a - peculiar curl that they would grind his fingers against the bat; many - a time have I seen the blood drawn in this way from a batter who was - not up to the trick: old Tom Walker was the only exception--I have - before classed him among the bloodless animals. - - Harris’s bowling was the finest of all tests for a hitter, and hence - the great beauty, as I observed before, of seeing Beldham in, with - this man against him; for unless a batter were of the very first - class, and accustomed to the first style of stopping, he could do - little or nothing with Harris. If the thing had been possible, I - should have liked to have seen such a player as Budd (fine hitter as - he was) standing against him. My own opinion is, that he could not - have stopped his balls, and this will be a criterion, by which those - who have seen some of that gentleman’s brilliant hits, may judge of - the extraordinary merit of this man’s bowling. He was considerably - faster than Lambert, and so superior in style and finish, that I can - draw no comparison between them. Lord Frederic Beauclerc has been - heard to say that Harris’s bowling was one of the grandest things of - the kind he had ever seen; but his lordship could not have known him - in his prime; he never saw him play till after he had had many fits of - the gout, and had become slow and feeble. - - To Harris’s fine bowling I attribute the great improvement that - was made in hitting, and above all in stopping; for it was utterly - impossible to remain at the crease, when the ball was tossed to a fine - length; you were obliged to get in, or it would be about your hands, - or the handle of your bat; and every player knows where its next place - would be. - -This long extract is not too long, for it contains a dignified study of -the bowler. - - This is the perfect Trundler, this is he, - That every man who bowls should wish to be. - -Harris was admired for ‘the sweetness of his disposition and his -manly contempt of every action that bore the character of meanness,’ -and he chiefly bowled for catches, as did Lord Frederick Beauclerk. -Nyren is no great hand at orthography, and he soon comes to speak of a -Sussex bowler named Wells. This is apparently the Wills, or Willes, who -has more credit than perhaps he deserves for bringing in round-hand. -‘He was the first I had seen of the new school, after the Walkers -had attempted to introduce the system in the Hambledon Club.’ Willes -had a twist from leg, and Nyren thinks Freemantle showed astonishing -knowledge of the game because he went in front of his wicket and hit -Willes, and ‘although before the wicket, he would not have been out, -because the ball had been pitched at the outside of the stump.’ A man -might play hours on that system ‘by _Shrewsbury_ clock,’ but I doubt if -David Harris would have approved of Freemantle’s behaviour. - -The student of the evolution of round-hand and over-hand bowling now -turns to the early exploits of William Lillywhite (_b._ June 13, -1792). Whatever Mr. Willes may have done, whatever Tom Walker may have -dreamed, William Lillywhite and Jem Broadbridge are practically the -parents of modern bowling. When Lillywhite came out, the law was that -in bowling the hand must be below the elbow. Following the example of -Mr. G. Knight, of the M.C.C., or rather going beyond it, Lillywhite -raised the hand _above_ the shoulder, though scarcely perceptible. -Lillywhite’s performances in 1827 caused much discussion among -cricketers and in the ‘Sporting Magazine.’ Letters on this subject are -reprinted by Mr. W. Denison, in ‘Sketches of the Players,’ London, -1846.[25] - -The last great match of 1827 was between Sussex and Kent, with -Saunders and Searle given. Mr. Denison, reviewing the match at the -time, predicted that if round-hand were allowed, there would be no -driving and no cutting to point or slip. This of course is part of -Unfulfilled Prophecy. ‘Broadbridge and others will shew that they -cannot be faced on hard ground without the most imminent peril.’ As a -compromise, Mr. Denison was for allowing straight-armed bowling, ‘so -that the back of the hand be kept under when the ball is delivered.’ -Mr. Steel’s chapter on bowling shows what the effect of that rule must -have been. - -In February, 1828, Mr. Knight published his letters in defence of -round-hand bowling. There had been, in the origin of cricket, no law to -restrain the bowlers. About 1804, the batting acquired such mastery, -and forward play with running-in (as Nyren knew) became so vigorous, -that Willes and Tom Walker tried round-hand. This round-hand was -‘straight armed, and for a time (1818–28) did very well, till bowlers -took to raising the hand, even above the head.’ M.C.C. then proclaimed -an edict against all round-hand bowling. Mr. Knight proposed to admit -straight-armed bowling, which could not be called ‘throwing.’ To define -a throw was as hard then as now--a man knows it when he sees it; it is -like the trot in horses. Mr. Knight’s proposed law ran, ‘The ball shall -be bowled; if it be thrown or jerked, or if any part of the hand or arm -be _above_ the _shoulder_ at the time of delivery, the umpire shall -call _No Ball_.’ - -In one of the trial matches (Sept. 1827) it is said that Mr. Knight, -Broadbridge, and Lillywhite, all bowled high over the shoulder. There -are no wides in the score. When a man was caught, the bowler’s name was -not given. Lillywhite has thus no wicket to his name. - -Mr. Knight’s law was discussed at Lord’s (May 19, 1828), and the word -_elbow_ substituted for _shoulder_. But Lillywhite and Broadbridge -bowled as before, and found many followers, till the M.C.C. passed -the law proposed by Mr. Knight. But the hand was soon raised, and the -extraordinary pace of Mr. Mynn (born 1807) was striven for by men who -had not his weight and strength. These excesses caused a re-enactment -of the over-the-shoulder law in 1845. - -Lillywhite was now recognised as the reviver of cricket. His analysis -in 1844 and 1845 gives about 6⅞ runs for each wicket. Round-hand, with -a practical license for over-hand, was now established; but, as late as -1860, a high delivery was a rarity. The troublesome case of Willsher -ended in permitting any height of delivery, and the greatest of all -bowlers, Mr. Spofforth, sends in the ball from the utmost altitude. - -This is a brief account of the evolution of round and over-hand -bowling. As to slow and fast bowling, Lord Frederick Beauclerk and -one of the Walkers were very slow bowlers in old days. William Clarke -(_b._ Dec. 24, 1798) was the classical slow bowler. Clarke was not a -regular lob bowler, but, like Lambert, delivered ‘about midway between -the height of the elbow and the strict under-hand, accompanied by a -singular peculiarity of action with the hand and wrist just as the -ball is about to be discharged.[26]’ He had a tremendous twist, and -great spin and ingenuity. Perhaps his success was partly due to the -rarity of slow bowling in his time. Men imitated Mr. Mynn, who was as -big a man as Mr. W. G. Grace, and a very fast bowler. In old underhand -times, Brett had a ‘steam-engine pace,’ and later, Browne of Brighton -was prodigiously fast. The Bishop of St. Andrews remembers seeing a -ball of Browne’s strike the stumps with such force and at such a point -that both bails flew _back_ as far as the bowler’s wicket. That was at -Brighton. He also remembers how at Lord’s, when Browne bowled, all the -field were placed _behind_ the wicket, or nearly so, that is at slip, -leg, and long-stop, till Ward went in, who, playing with an upright -bat, contrived to poke the ball to the off, and Browne himself (a tall, -heavy man) had to go after it. But this having happened more than -once, a single field was placed in front. Yet Beldham, as Mr. Pycroft -tells, quite mastered Browne, and made 76 off him in a match. Beldham -was then fifty-four. Browne’s pace was reckoned superior to that of -Mr. Osbaldeston. It is not easy to decide who has been the fastest of -fast bowlers. In our own day, I think that Mr. Cecil Boyle, when he -bowled for Oxford (1873), was the swiftest I have seen, except a bowler -unknown south of the Tweed, Mr. Barclay, now a clergyman in Canada. Mr. -Barclay was faster with under-hand than with round-hand. Beldham and -his comrades played Browne without pads; I have seen this tried against -Mr. Barclay--the results were damaging. Famous names of fast bowlers -are Mynn, Marcon, Fellowes, Tarrant, Jackson, Freeman, Hope Grant, -Powys, and Robert Lang. - -The history of bowling precedes that of batting, because the batsman -must necessarily adapt his style to the bowling, not _vice versâ_. He -must also adapt it to the state of the wickets. There are times when -a purely rural style of play, a succession of ‘agrarian outrages,’ is -the best policy. Given an untrustworthy wicket, good bowling, fielding -ground in heavy grass, a stone wall on one side, and another wall, -with a nice flooded burn beyond, on another side, and a batsman will -be well advised if he lifts the ball over the boundaries and into the -brook. Perhaps Mr. Steel will recognise the conditions described, and -remember Dalbeattie. In the origin of cricket, when the stumps were -low, and the bat a crooked club, hitting hard, high, and often must -have been the rule. A strong man with good sight must have been the -pride of the village. When David Harris, Tom Walker, Lumpy, Brett, and -other heroes brought in accuracy, spin, twist, and pace, with taller -wickets to defend, this batting was elaborated by Beldham and Sueter -and others into an art. Tom Sueter, first, fathered the heresy of -leaving the crease, and going in to the pitch or half-volley.[27] Sir -Horace Mann’s bailiff, Aylward, was the Shrewsbury of an elder age. ‘He -once stayed in two whole days, and got the highest number of runs that -had ever been gained by any member--_one hundred and sixty-seven_.’ Tom -Walker was a great stick. Lord Frederick was bowling to him at Lord’s. -Every ball he dropped down just before his bat. Off went his lordship’s -white, broad-brimmed hat, dash upon the ground (his constant action -when disappointed), calling him at the same time ‘a confounded old -beast.’ ‘I doan’t care what ee zays,’ said Tom, whose conduct showed -a good deal more of courtesy and self-control than Lord Frederick’s. -Perhaps the master-bat of old times was William Beldham from Farnham. -He comes into Bentley’s ‘Cricket Scores’ as early as 1787. The -players called him ‘Silver Billy.’ He was coached by Harry Hall, the -gingerbread baker of Farnham. Hall’s great maxim was ‘the left elbow -well up.’ - -From Nyren I extract a description of Beldham’s batting:-- - - BELDHAM was quite a young man when he joined the Hambledon Club; and - even in that stage of his playing, I hardly ever saw a man with a - finer command of his bat; but, with the instruction and advice of - the old heads superadded, he rapidly attained to the extraordinary - accomplishment of being the finest player that has appeared within - the latitude of more than half a century. There can be no exception - against his batting, or the severity of his hitting. He would get - in at the balls, and hit them away in a gallant style; yet, in this - single feat, I think I have known him excelled; but when he could cut - them at the point of the bat, he was in his glory; and upon my life, - their speed was as the speed of thought. One of the most beautiful - sights that can be imagined, and which would have delighted an artist, - was to see him make himself up to hit a ball. It was the _beau idéal_ - of grace, animation, and concentrated energy. In this peculiar - exhibition of elegance with vigour, the nearest approach to him I - think was Lord Frederick Beauclerc. Upon one occasion at Mary-le-bone, - I remember these two admirable batters being in together, and though - Beldham was then verging towards his climacteric, yet both were - excited to a competition, and the display of talent that was exhibited - between them that day was the most interesting sight of its kind I - ever witnessed. I should not forget, among his other excellencies, to - mention that Beldham was one of the best judges of a short run I ever - knew; add to which, that he possessed a generally good knowledge of - the game. - -In 1838 Beldham used to gossip with Mr. Pycroft. That learned writer -gives Fennex great credit for introducing the modern style of forward -play about 1800; this on the evidence of Fennex himself (1760–1839). -But probably accurate bowling, with a fast rise, on fairly good -wickets, must have taught forward play naturally to Fennex, Lambert, -Fuller Pilch, and others. It is not my purpose to compile a minute -chronicle of cricket, to mark each match and catch, nor to chant the -illustrious deeds of all famous men. The great name of Mr. Ward has -been already mentioned. The Bishop of St. Andrews, when a Harrow -boy, played against Mr. Ward, and lowered his illustrious wicket for -three runs.[28] Thus, with Mr. Ward, we come within the memory of -living cricketers. Much more is this the case with Mr. Budd, Fuller -Pilch, Alfred Mynn, Hayward and Carpenter, Humphrey and Jupp. Mr. Mynn -was the son of a gentleman farmer at Bearstead, near Maidstone. His -extraordinary pace actually took wickets by storm; men were bowled -before they knew where they were. The assiduous diligence of Mr. Ward -was a match for him. When about to meet Mynn, he would practise with -the fastest of the ground bowlers at Lord’s, at eighteen or nineteen -yards’ rise, so to speak. Mr. Ward’s great reach also stood him in good -stead. Mr. Mynn’s pace, and the excesses committed by his imitators, -for some time demoralised batting. Few balls were straight (among the -_imitatores, servum pecus_), and men went in to hit what they could -reach. The joy of getting hold of a leg-ball from a very fast bowler, -or of driving him, overpowered caution, and these violent delights -might have had violent ends if accuracy had not returned to bowling. In -1843 Mr. Mynn’s analysis gave 5⅖ a wicket. His average was but 17 an -innings. Scores were shorter fifty years ago.[29] - -My attempt has been to trace the streams of tendency in cricket rather -than to produce a chronicle--a work which would require a volume to -itself. Nothing has been said about fielding; because, however the ball -is bowled, and however hit, the tasks of catching it, stopping it, and -returning it with speed have always been the same. True, different -styles of batting and bowling require alterations in the position of -the fielders.[30] But the principles of their conduct and the nature -of their duty remain unaltered. One change may be noted. In ‘Juvenile -Sports,’ by Master Michel Angelo,[31] the author speaks of _byes_ -and _overthrows_ as ‘a new mode,’ ‘an innovation with which I am by -no means pleased. It is indeed true that this places the seekers out -continually on their guard, and obliges them to be more mindful of -their play; but then it diminishes the credit of the player, in whose -hands the bat is, as a game may be won by a very bad batsman owing to -the inability of the wicket-man, or the inattention of the seekers-out.’ - -The fallacy of this argument does not need to be exposed. - - * * * * * - -M.C.C. - -No sketch of the history of cricket would be complete without a note on -the fortunes of the Marylebone Club. This is the Parliament of cricket, -and includes almost all the amateurs of merit. There is nothing very -formal in its construction; and any clubs which please may doubtless -arrange among themselves to play _not_ according to M.C.C. rules. But -nobody so pleases; and Marylebone legislates practically for countries -that were not even known to exist when wickets were pitched at -Guildford in the reign of Henry VIII. Marylebone is the _Omphalos_, the -Delos of cricket. - -The club may be said to have sprung from the ashes of the White -Conduit Club, dissolved in 1787. One Thomas Lord, by the aid of some -members of the older association, made a ground in the space which -is now Dorset Square. This was the first ‘Lord’s.’ As to Lord, he is -dubiously said (like the ancestors of Nyren) to have been a Scot and -a Jacobite, or mixed up, at least, in some way with the ’45. Lord was -obliged to move to North Bank, and finally, in 1814, to the present -ground. The famous Mr. Ward had played at Lord’s before this migration; -his first match here was in 1810, and he played, more or less, till -1847, being then sixty years of age. His bats are said to have weighed -four pounds. Mr. Ward bought the lease of the ground from Lord in 1825, -‘at a most exorbitant rate;’ and, in 1830, Dark bought the remainder of -the lease from him. The first match on our present Lord’s, or the first -recorded, was M.C.C. _v._ Hertfordshire, June 22, 1814. In 1825 the -pavilion was burned, after a Winchester and Harrow match. The burning -of the Alexandrian Library may be compared to the wholesale destruction -of cricket records on this melancholy occasion. In 1816 the Club -reviewed the Laws: the result will be found in Lillywhite’s ‘Scores,’ -i. 385. ‘No more than two balls to be allowed at practice when a fresh -bowler takes the ball before he proceeds.’ A great deal too much time -is now wasted over these practice balls. ‘The ball must be delivered -underhanded, not thrown or jerked, with the hand below the elbow at the -time of delivering the ball.’ The umpire is to call ‘no ball,’ ‘if the -back of the hand be uppermost.’ As to l.b.w., the batter is out ‘if -with his foot or leg he stop the ball which the bowler, in the opinion -of the umpire, shall have pitched in a straight line to the wicket, and -would have hit it.’ - -The names of the Presidents are only on record after the fire. -Ponsonby, Grimston, Darnley, Coventry are among the most notable. The -renowned Mr. Aislabie was secretary till his death in 1842; in the -pavilion his bust commemorates him. Mr. Kynaston and Mr. Fitzgerald, -of ‘Jerks In from Short Leg,’ are other celebrated secretaries. In -1868 the Club purchased a lease of 99 years, at the cost of 11,000_l._ -There have been recent additions to the area, and to that celebrated -monument, the pavilion. - -[Illustration: The Royal Academy Club in Marylebone Fields. (After -Hayman, R.A. The property of the M.C.C.)] - -Lord’s is, as all the world knows, the scene, not only of Club and -of Middlesex matches, but of Eton and Harrow, Oxford and Cambridge, and -Gentlemen and Players, which is also contested at the Oval. Winchester -used moreover to play Eton here, but the head-masters have long -preferred a home and home affair. In other chapters these great matches -will be chronicled and criticised. - - * * * * * - -The various epochs in the history of the game may now be briefly -enumerated by way of summary. First we have the prehistoric age, when -cricket was dimly struggling to evolve itself out of the rudimentary -forms of cat-and-dog, and stool-ball. This preceded 154-, when we find -an authentic mention of the name of CRICKET. Just about the end of -the seventeenth century it was mainly a boys’ game. With the Augustan -age it began to be taken up by statesmen, and satirised by that ideal -whippersnapper, the ingenious but in all respects unsportsmanlike, Mr. -Pope. By 1750 the game was matter of heavy bets, and scores began to -be recorded. The old Hambledon Club gave it dignity, and the veterans -endured till quite modern times dawn with Mr. Ward. Then came the -prosperous heresy of round-hand bowling, which battled for existence -till about 1845, when it became a recognised institution. The wandering -clubs, chiefly I. Z. and the Free Foresters at first, carried good -examples into the remoter gardens of our country. The migratory -professional teams, the United and All England Elevens at least, showed -the yokels what style meant, and taught them that Jackson and Tinley -were their masters. But the lesson lasted too long. Nothing was less -exhilarating than the spectacle of twenty provincial players, with -Hodgson and Slinn, making many duck’s eggs, and fielding in a mob. -‘The first ‘ad me on the knee, the next on the wrist, the next blacked -my eye, and the fourth bowled me,’ says the Pride of the Village, in -‘Punch,’ after enjoying ‘a hover from Jackson.’ Such violent delights -had violent ends. The old travelling elevens are extinct, but railways -have ‘turned large England to a little’ field, so to speak, and -clubs may now meet which of old scarcely knew each other by name. -The Australian elevens have in recent days given a great impulse to -patriotic exertions. - -Scotch cricket is a thing of this century. Football and golf are the -native pastimes of my countrymen, as hurling is of Ireland. The Old -Grange Club is the M.C.C. of the North. The West of Scotland and -Drumpellier are other clubs of standing. That ever-flourishing veteran, -Major Dickens, still upholds the honour of Kelso. The Moncrieffs have -been the Wards and Budds of Edinburgh, nor will a touching patriotism -allow me here to omit the name of George Charles Hamilton Dunlop. For -some reasons Scotland has not been productive of bowlers. Professionals -are seldom reared there, nor have amateurs devoted themselves to the -more scientific and less popular part of the game. Mr. Barclay has -already been commemorated for his speed; a few only will remember Mr. -Sinclair and Mr. Glassford, who died young, and very much regretted. -Few men have done more for Scotch cricket than Mr. H. H. Almond, -head-master of Loretto School, which has contributed several players -to the Oxford eleven. An old ‘pewter’ may here congratulate Mr. Almond -on the energy with which he kept his boys to the mark, and on the -undaunted example which he set by always going in first. The names of -Arthur Cheyne, Jack Mackenzie, Edward Henderson, Chalmers, Hay Brown, -Leslie Balfour, and Tom Marshall are only a few that crowd on the -memory of the elderly Caledonian cricketer. In the Border district, of -which more hereafter, the houses of Buccleuch and Roxburgh have been -great friends of the game, and that was a proud day for ‘the Rough -Clan’ when Lord George Scott scored over 160 in the University match of -1887. Abbotsford, too, has been well to the front, thanks to the Hon. -J. Maxwell Scott, and, for some reason, Scotland has been occasionally -represented by Mr. A. G. Steel, and the Hon. Ivo Bligh, known to the -local press as ‘the Titled Batsman.’ But these are alien glories _et -non sua poma_. - -Three things are prejudicial to Scotch cricket. First, there is the -climate, about which more words were superfluous. Next, boys leave -school earlier than in England, for professions or for college. Lastly, -the University ‘session’ is in the winter months, and the University -clubs are therefore at a great disadvantage. I shall never forget -the miraculous wickets we tried to pitch on the old College Green at -Glasgow, and the courage displayed by divinity students in standing up -to Mr. Barclay there. As for St. Andrews, golf is too much with us on -that friendly shore, and will brook no rival. - - * * - * The author of the historical introduction is much indebted to - the Bishop of St. Andrews, a veteran of the first University Match, - for his kindness in revising proofs, and adding notes. He has also to - thank the Viscountess Wolseley for the loan of her picture of ‘Miss - Wicket’; and Mr. Charles Mills, M.P., for a sight of the silver ball - of the Vine Club. It was filled with snuff, and tossed from hand to - hand after dinner; he who dropped it being fined in claret, or some - other liquor. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[1] Outside of England Mrs. Piozzi found ‘a game called _Pallamajo_, -something like our cricket.’ If she meant _Pallone_, she merely proved -herself no cricketer. Mr. Arthur Evans has noticed, in Dalmatia, a kind -of trap-bat, a ‘cat’ being used in place of a ball, and the length of -hits being measured by the stick that serves as bat. - -[2] The learned have debated as to the origin of the local term ‘Dex.’ -Let it suffice to say that it is not what they suppose. - -[3] See M. de Charnay’s _Ancient Cities of the New World_, p. 96. -London, 1887. - -[4] Strutt’s _Sports and Pastimes_, 1810, pp. 89, 90; cf. Durfey’s -_Pills to Purge Melancholy_, i. 91. - -[5] _Popular Antiquities_, i. 153, _note_. London, 1813. The lines are -quoted by Brand from _A Pleasant Grove of New Fancies_, p. 74. London, -1657. He might have gone straight to Herrick, _Hesperides_ (1648), p. -280. - -[6] Edinburgh, 1841. - -[7] In married life, two are quite enough to play ‘cat and dog.’ - -[8] Compare _Loggat_. See _Hamlet_, v. 1, and _Nares’ Glossary_, s. v. - -[9] Brand, ii. 287, quotes a reference to ‘cat and doug’ from the _Life -of the Scotch Rogue_. London, 1722. The Scotch Rogue says nothing about -cricket. - -[10] P. 101. - -[11] The miniature in which a woman bowls to a back-handed player -with no wicket is dated 1344. Bodl., 264. But the evidence of art is -never very trustworthy. The painter may have been a woman, or a monk, -or an uneducated person. Many of the pictures in modern books give a -misleading view of cricket. - -[12] _Etymological Dictionary_, 1882. The writer here owes a great -deal to Dr. Murray, of the _English Dictionary_, who kindly lent him -the ‘slips’ (short, of course) on Cricket, as far as they have been -collected.--A. L. - -[13] See M. Charles Deulin’s tale, ‘Le Grand Choleur,’ in _Contes du -Roi Gambrinus_. There is a good deal of information in _Germinal_, by -M. Zola. The balls are egg-shaped, and of boxwood. The game is a kind -of golf, played across country. - -[14] Cotgrave’s _French Dictionary_, ‘Crosse,’ 1611. - -[15] _Diary_, p. 159; May, 1676. - -[16] i. p. 197. Letter xxi. - -[17] The bibliography of the _Dunciad_ is not a subject to be rushed -into rashly, nor in a note; but this must have been written between -1726–1735, there or thereabouts. The Scholiasts recognise Lord John -Sackville as the Senator, and quote a familiar passage from Horace -Walpole (June 8, 1747) about _Cricketalia_, instituted in his honour. -We may, perhaps, regard Lord John as one of the early patrons of the -game. - -[18] Gray’s _Works_, 1807, ii. p. 2. See also ‘urge the flying ball,’ -which must refer, I think, to cricket. That ode was first published in -1747. Johnson carelessly paraphrases ‘drives the hoop, or _tosses_ the -ball!’--C. W. - -[19] To George Montagu, May 6, 1726. - -[20] See also his _Wiccamical Chaplet_, 1804, where there is an -excellent ‘Cricket Song’ (p. 131 to 133) for the Hambledon Club, Hants, -1767, in the course of which the following names of cricketers occur: -Nyren, Small, Buck, Curry, Hogsflesh, Barber Rich (‘whose swiftness in -bowling was never equalled yet’), ‘Little George, the longstop, and Tom -Suter, the Stumper,’ Sackville, Manns, Boyton, Lanns, Mincing, Miller, -Lumpy, Francis.--C. W. - -[21] _The Cricketers Guide_, fourth edition, _s. a._, p. 58. - -[22] The Bishop of St. Andrews can remember when the creases were cut, -before chalk was used. - -[23] _Cricket_, An Heroic Poem, illustrated with the critical -observations of Scriblerus Maximus. By James Love, Comedian, London. -Printed for the Author, MDCCLXX. (Price, One Shilling.) - -[24] Talking of appearances, there is just one story of a ghost at a -cricket match. He took great interest in the game, and went home in -a dog-cart as it seemed to the spectators, though he (the real man, -not the wraith) was on his death-bed at a considerable distance. The -spectral dog-cart is the puzzle of the Psychical Society. The scene of -the apparition was the cricket ground of a public school. - -[25] The edition of Nyren’s _Cricketer’s Guide_, used here, is the -fourth, London, _s. a._ I owe it to Mr. Gerald Fitzgerald. Any -cricketer who has borrowed my own copy of the Editio Princeps will -oblige me by returning it.--A. L. - -[26] _Sketches of the Players_, p. 23. - -[27] Nyren, _op. cit._ p. 50. - -[28] It was three or five--I forget which. I know it was the _lowest -score_ he had that year!--C. W. - -[29] Was this so? The long scores caused the introduction of -round-hand bowling. From among my brother’s papers (late Bishop of -Lincoln) a letter has lately been returned to me which contains the -following:--‘Christ Church, Oxford: May 24, 1831.--Cricket, I suppose, -does not interest you; but you may like to know that in three following -innings, on three following days last week, I got 328 runs. Christ -Church has been playing--and beating--the University.’--C. W. - -[30] My experience, in one respect, is, I suppose, unique. Hitting a -leg-ball, I alarmed the umpire, who turned round, and I was caught by -the wicket-keeper off his back! Naturally enough--but yet--justly? he -gave me out!--C. W. - -[31] London, 1776, p. 76. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -BATTING. - -(BY THE HON. R. H. LYTTELTON.) - - -[Illustration: FIG. 1.--The champion.] - -The great and supreme art of batting constitutes to the large majority -of cricketers the most enjoyable part of the game. There are three -especially delightful moments in life connected with games, and only -those who have experienced all three can realise what these moments -are. They are (1) the cut stroke at tennis, when the striker wins -chase one and two on the floor; (2) the successful drive at golf, -when the globe is despatched on a journey of 180 yards; (3) a crack -to square-leg off a half-volley just outside the legs. When once the -sensation has been realised by any happy mortal, he is almost entitled -to chant in a minor key a ‘Nunc Dimittis,’ to feel that the supreme -moment has come, and that he has not lived in vain. - -After what has been said in the foregoing chapter we shall here only -touch upon the cricket of the past in so far as seems necessary to make -this dissertation on batting tolerably complete, and shall then proceed -to discuss the principles and science of the art as it now exists. - -The shape of the bat in the year 1746--which may be taken as a -beginning, for it was in that year that the first score of a match -was printed and handed down to posterity, at any rate in Lillywhite’s -‘Scores and Biographies’--resembled a thick crooked stick more than a -modern bat. - -From the shape of the bat, obviously adapted to meet the ball when -moving along the ground, one may infer that the bowlers habitually -delivered a style of ball we now call a ‘sneak.’ How long this system -of bowling remained in vogue cannot exactly be told. The famous William -Beldham, who was born in 1766, and lived for nearly one hundred years, -is reported by Nyren to have said that when he was a boy nearly all -bowling was fast and along the ground. As long as this was the case it -is probable that the bat was nothing but a club, for if the ball never -left the ground the operative part of the bat would naturally be at -the very bottom, as is usual in clubs. The renowned Tom Walker was the -earliest lob bowler; he probably took to the style late in life, or -about the year 1800, and several bowlers, notably the great E. H. Budd, -raised the arm slightly; but it is believed that the first genuine -round-arm bowlers were William Lillywhite and James Broadbridge, both -of Sussex, who first bowled the new style in 1827. That year was from -this cause a year of revolution in cricket, and the shape of the modern -bat dates from that period. As a rule, up to the year 1800 the style of -batting was back. William Fennex is supposed to have been the inventor -of forward play, and Beldham reports a saying of one Squire Paulett, -who was watching Fennex play: ‘You do frighten me there, jumping out -of your ground.’ The great batsmen of the early era of cricket were -Lord Frederick Beauclerk, Mr. Budd, Beldham, Bentley, Osbaldeston, -William Ward, Beagley, William Lambert, Jem Broadbridge, W. Hooker, -Saunders, and Searle. The great skill of these players, when opposed to -under-hand bowling, was what determined the Sussex players to alter the -style of bowling, and, indeed, it is generally the fact that too great -abundance of runs raises questions as to the desirability of altering -rules. - -After the year 1827 the shape of the bat became very like what it is -now, but it was much heavier in the blade and thinner in the handle, -which seems to indicate that the play was mostly of the forward driving -style, and the great exponent of this method of play was the renowned -Fuller Pilch. Anyone who has the opportunity of handling a bat of this -period will find that its weight renders it inconvenient for cutting, -but suitable for forward play. The change from under-hand bowling to -round-arm having been effected by slow developments makes it probable -that the style of play was generally forward until the under-hand -bowling was altogether superseded by round-arm. Some bowlers followed -the new order of things by changing from under to round-arm. Round-arm -bowling was at first less accurate than under-hand, and consequently -all-round hitting greatly developed; and we find Felix, the father of -cutting, who began play in 1828, chiefly renowned for this hit. Scoring -greatly diminished when round-arm bowling was thoroughly established, -and increased again as grounds got better. - -Judging from the scores of that day, the best bat in England from 1827 -to 1850 was Fuller Pilch, and his scoring would compare favourably with -that of nearly all modern players till 1874, with the exception of W. -G. Grace. He was a tall man, and used to smother the ball by playing -right out forward. - -The principle on which his whole play was founded was evidently to -get at the pitch and take care of the ball before breaks, bumps, and -shooters had time to work their devilries. In order to carry out this -method, he used frequently to leave his ground, and consequently the -famous Wm. Clarke always found Pilch a harder nut to crack than any of -his other contemporaries. - -Clarke’s slow balls tolerably well up were met by Pilch, who left his -ground and drove him forward with a straight bat. His master appears -to have been the great Sam Redgate, who was fast and ripping, and -who on one occasion got him out for a pair of spectacles, while, on -the other hand, twice in his life he got over 100 runs against Wm. -Lillywhite’s bowling, considered in those days to be an extraordinary -feat. After Pilch, Joseph Guy, of Nottingham, and E. G. Wenman, of -Kent, were considered the best; but several--C. G. Taylor, Mynn, Felix, -and Marsden, for example--scored largely, and they all passed through -a golden age of bowling, namely, about 1839, when Lillywhite, Redgate, -Mynn, Cobbett, and Hillyer all flourished, to say nothing of Sir F. -Bathurst, Tom Barker, and others. - -From the year 1855, when Fuller Pilch left off play, to the year 1868, -when W. G. Grace burst on the world with a lustre that no previous -batsman had ever approached, there was, nevertheless, a grand array of -batsmen--among professionals, Hayward, Carpenter, Parr, Daft, Caffyn, -Mortlock, and Julius Cæsar; and among amateurs, Hankey, F. H. Norman, -C. G. Lane, C. G. Lyttelton, Mitchell, Lubbock, Buller, V. E. Walker, -and Maitland. These are a few of the great names. They are, however, -surrounded by several almost as renowned, such as Stephenson, T. -Humphrey, Hearne, Cooper, Burbidge, Griffith, and others; all these, we -think, made this era of the game productive of more exciting cricket -than has been known since. It may seem odd, but the overpowering -genius of W. G. Grace after this time somewhat spoilt the excitement -of the game. His side was never beaten. Crowds thronged to see him -play, all bowling was alike to him, and the record of Gloucestershire -cricket, champion county for some time through his efforts, is the only -instance of one man practically making an eleven for several years. -The other Gloucestershire players will be the first to acknowledge -the truth of this. Gloucestershire rose with a bound into the highest -rank among counties when W. G. Grace attained his position amongst -batsmen, a head and shoulders above any other cricketer. In his prime -Gloucestershire challenged and on one occasion defeated England; when -he declined, Gloucestershire declined; in his old age she shows signs -of renewing her youth, for which all credit is due to young Townsend, -Jessop, Champain, and Board. To return to the period between 1855 and -1868: the greater equality of players made the matches more exciting -and established a keener because more evenly balanced rivalry. The -grounds were not so true as those of to-day, and the matches were not -so numerous; consequently cricketers were not so frequently worn out -by the wear and tear of long fielding and days and nights of travel as -they are now. The long individual scores having been less in number and -at longer intervals, the few great innings were more vividly stamped on -the memory, and it is doubtful if even the modern 200 runs per innings -will survive as historical facts longer than Hankey’s famous innings of -70 against the Players on Lord’s, Daft’s 118 in North _v_ South on the -same ground, and Hayward’s 112 against Gentlemen, also on Lord’s. - -The bowling during this period was generally fast or medium, varied -by lobs, but of genuine slow round, like that of Peate, Buchanan, -Alfred Shaw, and Tyler, there was hardly any in first-class matches. To -fast bowling runs come quicker than they do to slow; consequently the -game was of more interest to the ordinary spectator, and there was none -of that painful slowness, in consequence of the extraordinary accuracy -of modern slower bowling, that is so common now, and helps to produce -so many drawn matches. Though now, in the year 1897, the average -bowling pace is slower than it was in the sixties, it is nevertheless -faster than it was in the seventies. The professionals had literally -only one genuine slow round-arm bowler in those days--George Bennett, -of Kent--and of course this fact accounted largely for the batting -style of the period. Wickets being often rough, the most paying length -for fast bowling was naturally that length which gave the ground most -chance, and prevented the smothering style of play--a little shorter -than the blind spot, compelling back play over the crease, instead -of forward play. The best batsmen were great masters of this style -of play, with which the name of Carpenter is strongly identified. To -modern players the sight of Carpenter or Daft dropping down on a dead -shooter from a bowler of the pace of George Freeman or Jackson was a -wonderful one; but it is rapidly becoming a memory only, for in these -days a shooter may be said not to exist. Now, in 1897, a wonderful -feature of our great fast bowlers--pre-eminently Richardson--is not -that they bowl straighter than Freeman or Jackson, but that they -never bowl a ball on the legs or outside the legs. The result is that -orthodox leg hitting, and in particular the smite to long-leg with a -horizontal bat, and much nearer the ground than a square-leg hit, is -never seen. During the entire progress of a match nowadays, between -Notts and Lancashire, or Yorkshire and Notts, the unhappy batsman will -not get a single ball outside his legs to hit. So great is the accuracy -of the bowling, that over after over will go by, and not even a ball -on his legs will soothe his careworn and anxious brain. This accurate -bowling has caused another change in the way of batting. As no ball is -bowled on the leg side at all, so it consequently follows there is no -fieldsman on the on side except a forward short-leg and a deep field. -The batsman therefore waits till the bowler slightly overtosses a -ball--whether pitched outside the off stump or on the wicket he cares -not; he sweeps it round to square leg, where no fieldsman stands, and -he makes four runs by the hit. In other words, he deliberately ‘pulls’ -it. Twenty years ago, on seeing such a hit, the famous Bob Grimston -would have shown his emphatic disapproval in a characteristic manner. -But the match must be won by runs; to attain this object the ball must -be hit where there is no field, and it is useless to waste energy by -hitting the ball to every fieldsman on the off side. - -W. W. Read, Stoddart, and F. S. Jackson are all masters of this stroke, -which revives the drooping attention of the crowd and relieves the -monotony of the scorers. To all fast bowling the cut is a hit largely -in vogue, and the perfection to which some players arrive with regard -to this stroke is a joy to themselves and to the spectators. It is, of -course, as will be explained later on, much easier to cut fast bowling -than slow, and the heroes of the cut whenever fast bowling is on are, -and were, always numerous. - -The champion cutter of old times, by universal testimony, was C. G. -Lyttelton, whose hits in the direction of point are remembered by -spectators to this day. Tom Humphrey, of Surrey, was another great -cutter; and there was a player, not of the first rank, who was famous -for this hit--namely, E. P. Ash, of the Cambridge University Eleven, -1865 and 1866. - -The five champion bats of this era--1855 to 1868--were, in the opinion -of the writer, Hayward, Carpenter, Parr, Daft, and R. A. H. Mitchell. -The scoring of Hayward and Carpenter between 1860 and 1864 was very -large; both excelled on rough wickets, and it is on these wickets that -genius exhibits itself. - -In all times of cricket, until the appearance of W. G. Grace, there -has been a large predominance of skill amongst the professionals -as compared with the amateurs. We are talking now of batting; in -bowling the difference has been still more to the advantage of the -professionals. The Gentlemen won a match now and then, but their -inferiority was very great. W. G. Grace altered all this; and from 1868 -to 1880 the Gentlemen had a run of success which will probably never -be seen again. It was entirely owing to him, though the Players were -astonishingly weak in batting from 1870 to 1876; but nothing could -stop the crack, and his scoring in the two annual contests was simply -miraculous. - -We will now attempt to lay before our readers a more detailed -exposition of the principles which ought to govern sound batting, and -a careful observance of which is found in the method of every sound -player. The first consideration is the choice of a bat, and as to this -each individual must determine for himself what is the most suitable. -It is probable that a strong man will prefer a heavier bat than a -batsman of less muscular calibre. In any case the style of play is an -important consideration, but the secret of all batting, and especially -hitting, is correct timing; this is a quality which cannot be taught, -but this is what makes a weak man hit harder than a strong man--the one -knows exactly the fraction of a second when all that is muscular, all -that he has got in wrist and shoulders, must be applied, the other does -not. - -At the beginning of this century, when the bowling was fast -under-hand, the bat used was of a style suitable for meeting such -balls--namely, a heavy blade with great weight at the bottom; for, -as already mentioned, the bowling being straight and frequently on -the ground, driving was the common stroke, and for this a heavy blade -is best adapted. So now, if a player finds that he does not possess -a wrist style of play, but a forward driving game, he will probably -choose a heavier bat than the wrist-player; for a forward drive is more -of a body stroke--that is, the whole muscular strength of the shoulders -and back is brought into use, and the ball, being fully met, gives -more resistance to the bat than a ball which is cut. This, perhaps, -needs a little explanation. Just consider for a moment, and realise -the fact that a tolerably fast ball, well up and quite straight, has -been delivered. Such a ball is just the ball that ought to be driven. -The batsman lunges forward and meets it with very nearly the centre of -his bat, just after the ball has landed on the ground, at the time, -therefore, when, if there is any spin on it, it is going at its fastest -pace. Obviously, therefore, when the pace and weight of the ball are -taken into consideration, there is great resistance given to the lunge -forward of the bat. The heavier the blade of the bat the better is -it able to withstand and resist the contrary motion of the ball. As -a rule, players are not equally good both at the forward driving and -the wrist-playing games. Some few excel in both, but usually batsmen -have preferences. Now let us examine the cut--of course we are now -discussing a ball on the off side of the wicket. A wrist-player will -cut a ball that the exponent of the driving style would drive, and -therefore meet with the full, or nearly full, bat. The cutter does -not meet the ball, for the ball has gone past him before he hits it. -Take a common long-hop on the off side. The driver meets it with a -more or less horizontal bat, and hits it forward between cover-point -and mid-off, or cover-point and point, thereby resisting the ball and -sending it almost in an opposite direction to its natural course. He -hits the ball some time before it arrives on a level with his body, -while the cutter, on the other hand, does not hit the ball so soon; -in fact, he hits it when it is about a foot in front of the line of -the wicket, sometimes almost on a level with the wicket. He then, with -his wrist, hits it in the direction of third man. He does not meet the -ball at all, but he takes advantage of the natural pace of the ball -and, as it were, steers it from the normal course towards long-stop, -in the direction of third man. The whole essence of the distinction -lies in this fact, that in driving the ball is met directly by the -bat; in cutting this is not so; but the ball is, as it were, helped -on, only in a different direction. The faster the bowling, the harder, -therefore, will be the cut. The reader will at once see from this that -the wrist-player will probably prefer a lighter bat than the driving -batsman, and a bat that comes up well, as it is called, or is more -evenly balanced. - -We will now suppose a batsman properly equipped in pads and, at any -rate, one glove on the right hand, and with a bat to his taste; our -next inquiry must be as to his position at the wicket. He must remember -that, after having chosen one position--the most natural and convenient -to him--he ought to adopt that position invariably; not alter it from -day to day. You never see any material alteration in the position of -any great player, and if anyone takes the very necessary trouble to -find out the easiest position, he will be a foolish man who varies -it, as any change must be for the worse. There is an old engraving, -often seen, of a match between Surrey and Kent about the year 1840. -Old William Lillywhite is about to bowl, and Fuller Pilch is about to -play. The attitude and position of Pilch were taken by the author of -‘The Cricket Field’ as a model; and there is no objection to be raised -to the position: it is a fair assumption that it was the natural and -most convenient position for Fuller Pilch himself. The author, however, -goes on to say that this is substantially the attitude of every good -batsman. To this we can only rejoin, that out of the thousands of -batsmen who have played cricket, it would be difficult to find two who -stand exactly alike. To begin with, some stand with their feet close -together, others have them apart; some indeed so far apart that it -almost seems as if they were trying to solve the problem of how much -length of ground can be covered between the two feet. Some stand with -the right foot just on the leg side of a straight line drawn between -the leg-stump of the batsman’s wicket and the off stump of the opposite -wicket; others stand with the right foot twelve inches or thereabouts -from the leg-stump in the direction of short-leg. Players who adopt -this position run a risk of being bowled off their legs, one would -think; but they ought to know best; we should not, however, advise -a beginner to adopt this attitude. W. G. Grace faces the ball, and -there is no intervening space between his hands whilst holding the bat -and his legs. If you look at the position of Pilch, you will see a -considerable interval of distance from the back of his left hand and -the right leg. There were three notable batsmen--namely, A. N. Hornby, -W. Yardley, and F. E. R. Fryer--who used to throw their left leg right -across the wicket so as almost to hide it from the view of the bowler. - -[Illustration: FIG. 2.--W. G. Grace ready to receive the ball.] - -Mr. A. J. Webbe stoops very much in his position, while some players -stand almost at full height; notably is this the case with W. G. Grace. -There are, as far as we know, only three rules which must be observed -in taking up a position. The first is (1) stand so that no part of the -right foot is in front of the wicket or outside the crease; (2) stand -in the attitude most natural and convenient to yourself; (3) do not -place the toes of the right foot materially nearer the wicket than the -heel. The first rule is essential, for the good player never ought to -move his right foot to fast bowling. If, therefore, any part is in -front of the wicket, he runs a risk of being leg before wicket when the -ball beats the bat; if his foot is outside the crease he is in danger -of being stumped; and if the toes of the right foot are materially -nearer the wicket than the heel, he will find himself in a very awkward -position, unable to get over the ball. Subject to these rules, the -batsman takes any position he pleases. The bat should be held firmly -with the right hand and loosely or comparatively loosely with the left; -neither hand should be tightly clenched. The late Mr. Wm. Ward spoke -the truth when he told a sculptor who had made a statue of a batsman -at guard that he was no cricketer--the wrists were too rigid and hands -too much clenched. It seems that most players lift their bat from the -block-hole while the bowler is running prior to delivering the ball, -and fig. 2 shows W. G. Grace standing just before the ball leaves the -bowler’s hand. His whole position is changed from what it was a few -seconds before. His first position before the bowler has begun his run, -is given in the sketch at the head of the chapter. The figure here -shows him to be standing almost at his full height, his bat suspended -in the air, and his weight if anything thrown rather on his right foot. -Most players, however, take up a position and stick to it, except that -they raise the bat slightly just before the ball leaves the bowler’s -hand. Nature is the best guide. Let every player therefore find out the -easiest attitude and always adopt it. - -We will now consider the manner in which the bat should be held by -the hands. This varies in a few trifling particulars with different -players: but in very rare instances is there any substantial -difference. The muscles ought not to be in a state of rigidity, and -whilst the batsman is standing in position waiting for the ball the -bat should be held firmly, but not by any means tightly. The batsman -cannot depend on any particular ball coming to him; consequently, while -the ball is in the air, his mind has to be made up; he has then to set -himself for a stroke determined absolutely by the pace, length, and -direction of the ball, and there are only a few seconds for him both to -make up his mind and make the stroke. There is, no doubt, a scientific, -anatomical reason why quickness of hand and muscles is incompatible -with rigidity of muscle, but quite practicable when the muscles and -sinews are in a natural and easy state of elasticity; but any man will -find this out for himself if he begins to play. Hold the bat, then, -loosely with the left hand, nearly at the top of the handle, with the -back of the hand turned full towards the bowler, the fingers folded -round the handle, and the thumb lying easily between the first and -second fingers. The right hand is fixed exactly contrary to the left as -far as the back and fingers are concerned, for the back is turned away -from the bowler and the fingers are turned towards him. The thumb lies -across and rests on the top of the first finger, touching the finger -about a quarter of an inch from the top on the inside. When any sort of -hit or block is made the bat at that instant is held tightly, and both -thumbs are slightly shifted so as to lie on and clutch, not the fingers -that hold the handle, but the handle itself. Whether the hands are -high up on the handle or low down near the blade depends very much on -the style of the player. There is no rule on the subject, but we think -the old motto, ‘In medio tutissimus ibis,’ is good to observe, and -the middle of the handle is, on the whole, the safest. Some players, -however--notably Mr. Frank Penn, in his day a tremendous off-hitter -and altogether a grand bat--hold the bat with the knuckle of the first -finger of the right hand almost touching the top of the blade; and big -hitters, rather of the slogging order, as a rule hold the bat higher -up, with the left hand almost on the top; in fact, they adopt what may -be called the ‘long-handled style.’ In holding the bat, however, follow -the precept given before--namely, ascertain the most natural method, -and cling to it for your cricketing life. - -The actual position at the wicket is the same for both slow bowling and -fast, with perhaps this trifling difference, that the batsman ought -not to stand so firmly on the right foot to slow as he would to fast. -The reason of this will be explained hereafter, when we consider the -right method of playing slow bowling. At present we will confine our -attention to playing fast bowling, and let us assume that the batsman -has taken his natural position with his right toe clear of the wicket -and that a fast right-handed bowler is bowling with hand raised above -the shoulder and over the wicket. This is the method of bowling most -in vogue in these days; in fact, the strict round-arm bowling round -the wicket, with a curl from leg, is for some inscrutable reason now -comparatively rare. Why this is so nobody can tell, and we believe that -some of the present gigantic scoring is partly owing to the absence of -this sort of bowling. - -However, the popular method will be the first we shall try and -instruct the batsman to meet successfully, and we will suppose that -the wicket is fast and true. We will begin with laying down one or two -rules that must rigorously be observed by every player if he wishes -to become a first-rate cricketer. (1) _Never move the right foot when -playing fast bowling except to cut, or when you want to pull a very -short ball._ Nobody will ever become a first-rate player if he does -not strictly observe this rule. The spot of ground on which the right -foot rests is the vantage-point from which every batsman has to judge -of the direction of the ball, and if he shifts away from this, all -sorts of faults will crop up, chief of which will be an inability to -play with a straight or perpendicular bat. He will also, if he moves -his right foot towards short-leg--which is the commonest form this -vice takes--find that he will drive balls with a crooked bat to the -off, when from a proper position he would have hit them on the on -side. He will also find himself further removed from the off side, -and quite unable, therefore, to play with a straight bat on the off -stump. These are a few of the faults that come from not keeping the -right foot still. All coaches know that this habit of moving the right -leg is the fault most commonly found in young players, and it is most -difficult to remove. This arises from the fact that the ball is a -hard substance; the beginner naturally dislikes being hit anywhere on -the body, and his first and most powerful instinct is therefore to -run away. But many instincts are base in their nature, and the young -cricketer must realise in this, as in other cases, that the old Adam -must be put away and the new man put on. He will find, as he improves, -that in these days of true wickets he will not often get hit; the bat -will, as a rule, protect him, and if he is hit anywhere on or below -the knee the pads will perform a similar function. If he does get -hit, well, he must grin and bear it, and try to emulate the heroism -of some giants of old in ante-pad-and-glove days, of one of whom, the -famous Tom Walker, we read that he used to rub his bleeding fingers in -the dust, after the Mold of those days had performed a tattoo on his -fingers. (2) Never pull a straight fast ball to leg unless it is very -short and you are well in. If you miss it, you are either bowled out or -else you run a great chance of being given out leg before wicket. The -dead true wickets of these days have no doubt made many more batsmen -proficient at this stroke, but still it is sound to remember that you -must have got thoroughly used to the pace of the ground before you -try this stroke. Ranjitsinhji’s skill at this stroke is marvellous, -but few have such supple wrists. (3) Never slog wildly at a ball -well outside the off stump, but of a good length. This hit also may -occasionally come off, but there is no trap more frequently laid by -modern bowlers. Attewell, for example, bowls it so frequently that ‘the -Attewell trap’ is becoming a stock phrase, and a little consideration -will show how dangerous a stroke it is. A good length ball is one that -it is impossible to smother at the pitch, and if it is outside the -off stump it has to be played with a more or less horizontal bat, if -the slog is attempted. What must be the consequence? The ball is not -smothered, consequently any break, hang, or rise that the bowler or -the ground may impart to the ball must almost inevitably produce a bad -stroke, frequently terminating in a catch somewhere on the off side. -The proper way to play such a ball will be discussed later on, but -under no circumstances must the ball be hit at wildly at the pitch. (4) -Keep the left shoulder and elbow well forward when playing the ball. It -is more important in back play than forward, because in forward play -the ball is, or ought to be, smothered at the pitch, and the value of -the left shoulder being forward is that you are much more master of -the ball if it should happen to bump or hang; besides which, the bat -cannot easily be held straight unless this rule is observed, neither -can the full face of the bat be presented to the ball. In the case of -the shooter, or ball which keeps low after the pitch, the movement of -the left shoulder towards the left or leg side will inevitably make it -more difficult to ground or lower the bottom of the bat. - -The art of defence--which is the style of play adapted to stop the -ball, as distinguished from the offensive method, where the object -is to hit the ball so as to obtain runs--may be roughly divided into -forward play and back play. The object of all forward play is to -smother the ball at its pitch; that is to say, the contact of the bat -with the ball must be almost simultaneous with the contact of the ball -with the ground. The player must reach out with a straight bat as near -to the pitch of the ball as is possible. It stands to reason that a -tall man will reach out much further than a short man, and a bowler, if -he is wise, will bowl shorter-pitched balls to a tall man than he will -to a short. Let anybody take a bat and reach forward as far as he can, -keeping the bat, when it touches the ground at the end of the stroke, -slanting so that the top of the handle is nearer to the bowler than -the bottom of the blade. There comes a distance when this slant cannot -be maintained, and the bat has either to be held in a perpendicular -position or with the handle sloping behind the blade and pointing -towards the wicket-keeper. Here, then, we come to an invariable rule, -viz. never play forward to a ball so that you are unable to keep the -bat at the proper slant, with the handle of the bat further forward -than the blade. Also, let every player remember that the left foot -must be placed as far forward as the bottom of the bat, and all play, -whether forward or back, is really between the two feet, or, more -strictly speaking, in forward play the bat must not be put further -forward than the left foot, and in back play not further back than the -level of the right foot. - -Some old players may very likely not agree with this precept, and -players of the date of Fuller Pilch constantly had their bat a great -deal further out than the left foot, which used not to be thrown out -so far. Mr. C. F. Buller, again, in his day a magnificent bat, used to -play forward in the same style. But let anyone take a bat and throw out -his left foot to the fullest extent; he will find that the bat ought -not to go any further if the proper slant be maintained, and he will -find also that he has greater command over the ball in this position -than in Fuller Pilch’s. Look at the position in fig. 3, and you will -see that the bat has come down strictly on a level with the left foot. -That a greater command is obtained by this method cannot be proved -in writing, but anyone who tries the old and the new style will find -that the new is preferable as far as command of the ball is concerned. -We are not implying that the great players of the old style were bad -players because they played in the contrary way, for great players -rise above rules and play by the force of their greatness; but we are -chiefly concerned with the ordinary mortal, and our advice is, throw -the left leg right out and play to the level of the left foot. Some -good players maintain that, as the shooter comes so seldom nowadays, -it is wasting power to ground the bat when playing forward, it being -sufficient if it is placed according to circumstances, varying with the -state of the ground. This is no doubt true when the wickets are hard, -but if the miraculous should happen and a shooter come, the batsman is -out, and on soft wickets they still come. Fig. 3 illustrates grounding -the bat in forward play, and fig. 14, at the end of this chapter, -illustrates playing forward without grounding. - -[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Forward play.] - -The ball which is too short for the player to play forward to with his -bat at the proper slant must be played back and not forward. To be a -good judge of a ball’s length is a source of strength in any player, -and a strictly accurate player seldom makes the mistake of playing -forward when he ought to play back, and _vice versâ_. In cricket, -however, poor human nature is apt to err oftener perhaps than in most -walks of life, and the question may now be asked, What is the batsmen -to do when he finds himself playing forward, but unable to smother the -ball at the pitch? He has made a mistake; how is he to get out of the -difficulty? Let it be remembered that we are at present only concerned -with a fast and true wicket, the play on a slow tricky wicket being so -different that it will be noticed separately. - -Let us assume, then, that the batsman is forward in the position here -shown, but that he finds he cannot reach far enough to smother the ball -at the pitch. On a fast wicket there is no time to rectify the error -by getting back and playing the ball in the orthodox manner; and yet -the batsman must do something or he will be bowled out. There are three -courses open to him. (1) He must trust to Providence and a good eye, -and take a slog, or adopt what a humorous cricketer once called ‘the -closed-eye blow,’ in which case, if hit at all, the ball will probably -be hit into the air, but perhaps out of harm’s way, or, as is quite as -likely, into a fielder’s hands. The famous E. M. Grace, who is blessed -with as good an eye as any cricketer, frequently plays this stroke with -success. (2) He may adopt what lawyers would call the cy-près doctrine; -in other words, though he ought to play forward and smother a ball, -he may at the same time play forward and not smother the ball, which -may hit the bat nevertheless. The dangers of this play are obvious -to every cricketer, for it leaves him at the mercy of the ball that -bumps, hangs, or turns. Modern grounds are so good that this stroke -is far safer than it used to be; for in the majority of instances the -ball comes straight on, and only the experienced observer sees that -the batsman comes off with flying colours owing to the excellence of -the ground rather than to his skill. (3) He may, after he has got -forward and perceived his error, effect a compromise and perform what -is sometimes called a ‘half-cock stroke.’ This stroke does not require -a violent shuffling about of the legs and feet, which are placed as -they would be while playing forward, but, instead of the arms and -hands reaching forward, they are brought back so as to hold the bat -quite straight over, or a little in front of, the popping crease. This -position and style of play may be observed in fig. 4, and it is worth -a careful examination; for, in our opinion, it is the proper way for a -man to extricate himself out of the difficulty he has been led into by -misjudging the length of the ball. Nobody can play a ball in this way -more skilfully than W. G. Grace, and the figure shows him in the act -of thus playing to a ball which is on the blind spot--that is, either -adapted for forward or back play, and therefore eminently qualified for -over the crease play, a compromise between the two. The merit of this -style of play is that it gives the batsman time to watch the ball, and -if it should bump or turn he may alter his tactics to meet it, whereas -by the second method his play is fixed and cannot be altered, and the -awkward hanging, bumping, or twisting ball beats him. Practise by all -means this half-cock stroke; on fast grounds it may be found more -useful than even the orthodox back play; for in back play, unless the -ball is very short, the pace of the ground may beat a man, especially -when he first goes in and has not got accustomed to the pace. The -golden rules to guide the beginner in playing forward may be very -briefly stated. (1) Play forward when the ball is fairly well pitched -up, but remember that the faster the bowling and the faster the wicket -the more frequently will forward play be the safer style of play. -(2) Keep the bat quite straight and the left shoulder and elbow well -forward. (3) Get as near to the pitch of the ball as possible. (4) Do -not put the bat further forward than the level of the left foot, which -ought to be thrown right forward. - -[Illustration: FIG. 4.--‘Half-cock’ or over the crease play.] - -It is often a doubtful question whether a straight drive forward is -what is technically a drive or hit, or mere forward play. Of course, -when the batsman is well set he may hit as hard as he can to a straight -half-volley; but there are many players whose forward play is so -powerful that it practically amounts to a drive. Stoddart’s forward -play frequently makes mid-off tremble, and the same used to be said of -Ford and several other players. - -But to the beginner again: until you are well set, do not let all your -strength go out to any straight ball; if you do, you will lose more -than you gain. On Lord’s, for instance, a hit over the ropes can only -realise four, the same as a hit under the ropes; you will very likely, -therefore, score as many for a straight hard bit of forward play as you -will for a regular swipe. - -When the art of back play to fast bowling is discussed, the converse -of what has been said about forward play is true, viz. that as the -faster the ground the more balls ought to be played forward, so -under the same circumstances will fewer balls be played back. As a -general rule, it may be observed that strong-wristed players play more -back than batsmen who play chiefly with their arms and shoulders. A -weak-wristed player playing back on a very fast wicket will frequently -be late, and either miss the ball altogether or else half-stop it, -in which latter case it may dribble into the wicket. The value of a -strong wrist is that the batsman can dab down on a ball and do the feat -in a far shorter space of time than a shoulder-and-arm player. The -difference between a strong wrist and a weak wrist in playing back is -a little similar to what is observed in an altogether different line. -Look at a great underbred cart-horse with a leg like a weaver’s beam, -and then look at the real thoroughbred with its slim proportions; at -first sight it appears that a kick from the cart-horse will inflict -much greater damage than a kick from the thoroughbred. People who -are learned in horses, however, inform us that the contrary is the -case, and the greater weight of the leg of the cart-horse is more -than counterbalanced by the far more rapid and sudden movement of the -thoroughbred. The bat wielded by a player with a strong wrist goes -through the air like lightning, and comes down on the ball far quicker -and harder than a ponderous stroke from the arms and shoulders of the -batsman with no wrist action. Perhaps the champion back-player of the -century was Robert Carpenter, of Cambridgeshire and United All England -renown, whose back play on Lord’s to the terrific fast bowling of -Jackson and Tarrant will never be forgotten by those who beheld it. - -[Illustration: FIG. 5.--‘Back play’ to a bumping ball.] - -A back style of play does not smother the ball at the pitch, but -plays at the ball when its course after contact with the ground is -finally determined, and a careful watching of the ball is therefore of -the highest importance. It is bad ever to assume that, because a ball -has pitched on a line with the off stump, therefore you are safe if you -protect the off stump only, on the assumption that the ball is going on -straight. The ball may break back, and in order to ascertain that it -has done so, and to shift your bat to guard the middle and leg stumps, -you must carefully watch the ball. Apart from breaking or curling, the -ball may shoot or bump; in either case the batsman has only his eye to -guide him, and the wrist has to obey the eye. Fig. 5 represents ‘back -play’ to a bumping ball. Sometimes a ball may be so short that if the -batsman has got his eye well in, and is thoroughly accustomed to the -pace of the ground, he may by a turn of the wrist, keeping the left -shoulder and elbow well forward, steer the ball through the slips. The -beginner, however, must be careful to attempt nothing but the orthodox -forms of play; he is not W. G. Grace or Shrewsbury and such-like, who, -in their turn, do not attempt exceptional feats until they are well -set. The ball ought to be met with the full face of the bat, and under -no circumstances ought the ball to be allowed to hit the bat, which -must be the propeller, not the propelled. Mind to respect and carefully -follow out the two great commandments--never to move the right foot, -and to keep the left shoulder forward and left elbow up. The number of -hours that a youngster has to be bowled at before that fatal right foot -can be relied upon to keep still is prodigious; but the bat cannot be -straight if the body is gravitating towards the direction of short leg -while the ball is in the air. To a very short ball different methods -of play may be adopted. The one alluded to above, the steering of the -ball through the slips, is not often attempted, and a safer method -would be to try and come heavily down on the ball and force it past -the fields for two or three runs. This is a safe stroke, much safer to -adopt than the other. The bat must be straight, and it is wise not to -let your whole strength go out, for one or two contingencies may arise -for which the player ought to be prepared. In the first place, the ball -may shoot, and the crisis must be met accordingly. Now, if the whole of -the strength and all the faculties of a batsman are bent towards the -carrying out of one particular stroke, there will be no reserve left to -provide for any other contingency, for the muscles will be wholly set -for one stroke, and one stroke only, and the player will infallibly be -late if the ball should keep a little low. Of course, on a great many -grounds in these days the chances of such contingencies are reduced -almost to a minimum on account of the excellence of modern wickets; but -still we have to inform the reader what _may_ happen, not only what -happens commonly. Some few players rise superior to grounds, and though -of course they can get many more runs on easy wickets, still they show -good cricket when the wicket is in favour of the bowler. - -The prevalence of easy wickets is not, in our opinion, an unmixed -blessing. You may go and watch a match when the ground is as hard as -iron and as true as truth, and see a magnificent innings played by some -batsman. The same player on a bowler’s wicket is not less uncomfortable -than the proverbial fish out of water. A man may be a lion on a lawn, -but a mere pigmy when the ground is not a lawn. There are a great -many of these lions on lawns in these days, and to hear them all with -one consent begin to make excuse when they have been bowled out on a -crumbling wicket is very amusing. The ball hung, or it kept low, or -‘broke back a foot, I assure you, dear boy. W. G. in his best days -wouldn’t have been near it.’ In his best days, and almost in his worst, -Mr. Grace would have often played it, and so would Steel, Shrewsbury, -and one or two others--planets among the stars, to watch whom getting -thirty runs out of a total of eighty on a difficult wicket is far more -enjoyable to a skilled spectator than to see the hundreds got on ABC -wickets. The chances that on a hard smooth wicket the very short ball -will do anything abnormal is, nowadays, reduced to a minimum. But still -it may happen, and it is therefore wise to have in reserve a little -strength and a little elasticity. You can play very hard, nevertheless, -and for this hard forcing stroke off a short straight ball W. Yardley, -the late B. Pauncefote, H. C. Maul, and F. G. J. Ford have never been -surpassed. - -The ball most to be dreaded for the forcing stroke is the hanging -ball, which stops and does not come on evenly and fast to the bat. The -batsman will fail to time the ball, with the almost certain consequence -that the bat will go on and the ball will be hit from underneath, and -up it will go. The advice that has been given to keep a slight reserve -of strength to provide against such contingencies as the hanging ball -has the same force now. If you have not altogether let the whole force -go out, you will have a better chance of doing the correct thing to a -ball of this description--namely, to drop the bat and allow the ball -to hit it, the exact opposite of your original intention. This is an -exception to the general rule that the bat should hit the ball, and not -the ball the bat. - -In all cases a quick and correct eye will enable its owner to come out -of the difficulty with flying colours, and any rules that may be laid -down will be utterly useless to him who puts his bat just where the -ball is _not_, but where his inaccurate eye thinks it is. If a youth -with the best intentions, but with a false and crooked eye, after -reading and thoroughly comprehending every rule directing how every -ball ought to be played, stands up and tries to play cricket, what -will be the result? He may even have courageously learnt to pin his -right foot firmly to the ground; but, notwithstanding this, the result -of his efforts will be that, though all proper and necessary postures -may be assumed, he will be bowled out, for the bat, except by a lucky -chance, will always be in the wrong place, though held quite straight. -If cricket could be played with no ball, the careful eyeless cricketer -would shine; but the introduction of that disturbing element dashes all -his hopes to the ground. - -There is a ball that in these days more frequently than any other -succeeds in bowling people out, and that is the familiar ‘tice’ or -‘yorker.’ This is nothing else than a ball right up, that pitches in -fact near the block-hole, but is not a full pitch. This ball ought to -be met by the bat just when it touches the ground, and the bat ought -to come down very heavily on the ball. It is a little difficult to -understand why this ball is so frequently fatal, as it comes straight -up and only requires a straight bat and correct timing. Probably most -batsmen hope that the eagerly-looked-for half-volley has at length -come; this induces them to lay themselves out for a smite, and when -they see their mistake it is too late to alter the tactics. Others, on -the contrary, think that a full-pitch is coming, and advance their bat -to meet it; the result is, the ball gets underneath it. In fact, the -length of the ball is not correctly judged, and the batsman is caught -in two minds. A bowler who is in the habit of sending down ‘yorkers’ is -fond of doing so the first ball after a new batsman comes in, and if -a batsman is known to be of a nervous temperament there is no better -ball to give in the first over. It may be here said, however, that it -is next door to impossible to bowl a ‘yorker’ to some batsmen. W. G. -Grace, for instance, seems always to be able to make a full-pitch of -this ball, and a fourer often results. It is obvious that if a ball -pitches near or on a level with the block-hole when the batsman is -standing still, it ought to be easy to make it a full-pitch by stepping -out to meet it. Mr. Grace does this even to fast bowling. - -Having endeavoured to the best of our ability to enunciate a few -principles as to defensive tactics, we will now try and discuss -offensive tactics, or hitting. A curious feature of the present day -is that new hits have come into existence. These have not sprung up -because they were not occasionally brought off in earlier days, but -formerly when they were the batsman used to apologise to the bowler -for having wounded his feelings, and a sort of groan used to be heard -all round, as if there had been some gross violation of a cricket -commandment. The grounds have improved to such an extent that bowlers -have had to resort to new tactics to effect the grand object of all -bowlers--namely, to get wickets. - -A fast bowler has one system of tactics, a medium and slow bowler -another. On hard level wickets a fast bowler in these days is very apt -to bowl short on the off stump and try and make the ball bump, and to -cram a lot of fields in the slips, while the wicket-keeper stands back. -The sort of ball that bowls a man out is frequently a ‘yorker.’ This -is not the perfection of bowling, it is a bad style that the modern -perfect wicket has caused to come in. A bowler who keeps a splendid -length with really scientific methods, like Hearne, has his reward in -uncertain weather and on catchy wickets, but the baked smooth wickets -of modern-day cricket produce such bowlers as Jessop and Jones the -Australian, who mainly bowl for catches in the slips--and who can blame -them? Slow bowlers have to sacrifice accuracy and length to get twist -or break like Trott, the Australian captain, and Hartley the Oxonian, -and Wainwright; this is also because the perfect wickets will not allow -the combination of length and break. So the bowlers have to cultivate -an abnormal break, which cannot be done without the sacrifice of length. - -[Illustration: FIG. 6.--Gunn cutting.] - -Of all hits, the most fascinating to the intelligent spectator is the -cut. This requires a very strong use of the wrist, and, like all wrist -strokes, charms the spectator by accomplishing great results at the -expense of apparently little effort. Cricket reporters of the present -day are very apt to call any hit that goes in any direction between -cover-point and long-slip a cut, and thereby make the term include both -snicks and off drives. This is a mistake, as nearly every cricketer -can sometimes make an off drive, and all can snick the ball, even the -worst; indeed, with some it is the only stroke they seem to possess, -but there are many who have hardly ever made a genuine cut in their -lives. The real genuine cut goes to the left side of point--assuming -that point stands on a line with the wicket--it is made with the right -leg thrown over, and its severity depends largely on the perfectly -correct timing of the ball. The ball is hit when it has reached a -point almost on a line with the wicket, and the length of the ball is -rather short; if far up, it is a ball to drive and not to cut. The bat -should hit the ball slightly on the top, and the most correct cutting -makes the ball bound before it gets more than six yards from the -player. Figs. 6 and 7 show Gunn and Shrewsbury in the position proper -for cutting. It is a mistake to suppose that the right leg should be -thrown over a long way; it is sufficient if the foot be put in front -of the off stump. When the player is well in and has thoroughly got -the pace of the ground, he very often makes what may be called a clean -cut; that is to say, he hits with a bat quite horizontal to the ball, -and not over it. This produces a harder hit, as the force is wholly -directed towards sending the ball in the proper direction, and not hard -on the ground. It is not so safe, because, if the ball should bump, the -bat, not being over the ball, may hit its lower side and send it up. -Therefore be careful to hit over, and sacrifice some of the severity, -if you wish to play a safe game. - -[Illustration: FIG. 7.--Shrewsbury cutting.] - -Some careful players would hit over the ball even after they have -scored one hundred runs, and we have never seen Shrewsbury, for -instance, cut in any other way. In the figure the ball must be -presumed to lie rather low, for it is certain that he is following his -invariable custom of getting over the ball. In any case we should never -recommend the clean cut to any but the best players, and that only on a -perfect wicket and when they are well set. If you are in the position -to cut and the ball should bump, it is wise to leave it alone, for the -danger of being caught at third man is very great. We have seen lusty -hitters get right under a bumping off ball and send it high over third -man’s head, but it is a perilous stroke, and is not correct cricket. If -the ball, on the other hand, keeps a bit low after the pitch, it is a -most effective stroke to come heavily down on it; if the force is put -on the ball at the right moment it will go very hard, and may be called -a ‘chop.’ Messrs. K. J. Key and O’Brien, who are strong players from -every point of view, excel at this stroke, and they hit the ground at -the same time as the ball with a great power of wrist. It is useless -for anybody to hope to cut well unless he has both a strong wrist and -the power of timing. - -The question now arises, What is the player with a weak wrist to do -with a ball that a strong-wristed man cuts? Some would say that if -he cannot cut in the orthodox vigorous way he ought at any rate to -go as near to it as he can, and if he cannot make a clean cut for -four, at least he should content himself with two. We think, however, -there is for such players a more excellent way. In the cut we have -been describing the right foot is shifted across: suppose the player -now moves his left foot, not across, but simply straight forward to a -ball that is in every way suitable to cut; let him then wait till the -ball has gone just past his body, and then hit it with the full force -of his arms and shoulders and with as much wrist as he has got. The -ball will naturally go in the same direction as the orthodox cut, and -quite as hard. The player must stand upright, and must especially be -careful not to hit the ball before it has passed his body. If he does -this off a fast long hop, he will bring off a vulgar sort of stroke, -which cannot go so hard as the ball hit later, because there is greater -resistance to the bat; in the correct way the bat hits the ball partly -behind it and, as it were, helps it on in its natural course, whereas -at the incorrect moment the ball has to be thumped in order to send it -in an exactly opposite direction from that in which it is going before -meeting the bat. - -In our judgment coaches ought to teach all beginners this stroke -whenever they find weakness of wrist. The body is put in such a way as -to compensate for a weak wrist, and if anyone takes up this position -with a bat in his hand he will find that the stroke partakes of the -qualities of a drive more than of a cut. Young players are generally -rather impatient, and very apt to hit the ball before it reaches the -level of the body, and this fault must be removed. - -[Illustration: FIG. 8.--Old-fashioned sweep to leg. (Gunn.)] - -Let us now discuss the leg hit--most glorious of hits--where every -muscle of the body may safely be exerted; for if you miss it the ball -is not straight, so you cannot be bowled, and the harder the hit the -less chance is there of being caught, at any rate in first-class -matches in these days of boundaries. Bowling having become more -accurate, there is not half so much leg hitting now as there used to -be, and in the present day you hardly ever hear of a batsman known for -his hitting as George Parr was formerly, as also Mr. R. A. H. Mitchell, -and several others. - -There are plenty of men who can hit to leg, but in these days they -do not often get a chance, and it is a rare event nowadays to see any -fieldsman standing at the old-fashioned position of long-leg. There is -generally a field stationed against the ropes to save four byes when -a fast bowler is on, who can also stop leg snicks from going to the -ropes; but, to carry the illustration farther, as in leg hitting there -is no George Parr, so in fielding at long leg there is no Jack Smith -of Cambridge. It is rapidly dying out. In a match which we ourselves -saw at Sheffield in 1887, between Notts and Yorkshire, for a whole day -and a half there was not one genuine leg smack except off lobs, and at -no time was a field placed there. This is hard for the batsman, but it -is even harder for the spectators, who love to see a grand square-leg -hit. George Parr’s leg hit, for which he was unrivalled, was the sweep -to long-leg off a shortish ball that many modern players would lie -back to and play off their legs. George Parr would extend his left leg -straight forward, and sweeping round with a horizontal bat, send the -ball very hard, and frequently along the ground. This hit has really -totally disappeared in these days. When George Parr played he used to -punish terrifically bowlers like Martingell, of Surrey and Kent, who -relied on a curl from leg and bowled round the wicket--a most effective -style, naturally producing, however, many leg balls. It is all the -other way now, and it may be taken for certain that for every leg ball -you see now in first-class matches you saw ten or twenty in former -days. However, young players in schools are certain to get plenty of -convenient balls to hit, so they must remember to throw out the left -leg and hit as near to the pitch as possible and as hard as they can. -The ball may start in the direction of square-leg, but its natural bias -after it has gone a certain distance will be towards long-leg or behind -the wicket, and the fieldsman must remember this, or he will find the -ball fly away behind him on his right side. Be very careful never to -try this stroke to balls that are on the wicket, or even nearer the -wicket than four inches at least. If it is within that distance it is -a ball to drive, and not to hit to leg. Fig. 8 shows Gunn carrying -out this stroke, and the batsman may put his left leg in front of the -wicket if he is certain the ball did not pitch straight. This hit -ought only to be attempted when the ball is short of a half-volley. If -the ball is a half-volley or at any rate well up, the proper hit is -in front of the wicket or to square-leg, and with a vertical, not a -horizontal bat. In this hit, how far to throw out the left leg depends -on the length of the ball; the batsman may even sometimes have to draw -it back a little and stand upright and face the ball if it is well up. -There is no hit that can be made harder than this to square-leg, and -there have been many records of gigantic square-leg hits. Some hitters -have sent the ball as far by the lofty smack straight over the bowler’s -head, but more batsmen can generally hit farther to square-leg, and -only a short time ago Mr. Key sent a ball right out of the Oval. In -years gone by Lord Cobham and R. A. H. Mitchell were renowned for their -square-leg hitting, as was Carpenter also. There is no very special -rule to be observed for this hit, except that the ball must be on the -legs or just outside them, and not straight, or within four or five -inches of the leg stump. If the ball is tolerably wide on the leg -the bat will be more horizontal as it hits the ball, which will in -consequence go sharper, and _vice versâ_, if the ball is just crooked -enough to hit; it will, when hit, go more straight, and be called by -the cricket reporters an ‘on drive,’ though it is a square-leg hit. -Fig. 9 is supposed to represent W. G. Grace hitting to square-leg, and -the reader must assume that the fieldsman is running to field the ball -going on a line or in front of the wicket, and not behind it. - -[Illustration: FIG. 9.--Square-leg hit. (W. G. Grace.)] - -Some players there are who never seem to hit at any ball, but push -it all along the ground, and for this purpose they get farther over -the ball, and simply use the weight of the body, using the arms and -shoulders but little. - -This is an eminently safe game, but to these players we would only -observe that they deprive themselves of the glorious sensation, -alluded to at the beginning of this chapter, which comes when a ball -is hit with all the force that nature can supply and a fine driving -bat can supplement. Cricket is a game; the primary object of games is -to give pleasure to the players, and it is quite impossible that the -same amount of keen gratification can await the stick who never hits -as is realised by the man who, though he may only be at the wickets -half the time, yet in that time makes at least ten great hits that -will realise forty runs. There is, however, a good length ball on the -legs to which this push can be usefully applied if the batsman is one -of the numerous class of cricketers who cannot make use of the sweep -to leg. This stroke is made by slightly moving out of the ground, or -rather, the whole weight of the body being inclined forward the right -foot is dragged forward also. This may seem to violate a cardinal -rule laid down before--that the right foot should never be moved. It -must be remembered that the reasons why the right foot should not be -moved mainly apply when the foot is moved in front of the wicket or -towards short-leg. It is invariably wrong to go out of your ground -when the fast ball is straight or on the off side, for in both these -instances, if you miss the ball, even if it does not hit the wicket, -you are under the risk of being stumped. But to move out of your ground -to a fast ball on your legs practically lays you open to no danger of -being stumped, for if you should miss the ball you will stop it with -your legs. Now imagine yourself utterly unable to sweep the ball to -leg as George Parr used to do, and receiving a ball that you cannot -reach at the pitch so as to hit with a straight bat--in other words, -rather a short ball--what are you to do? If the ball is very short you -will probably get back, bring your left foot on a line with, and close -to, the right, and try either to make the ball glide off your bat to -long-leg or play it with a full face for a single in front of short-leg. - -Fig. 10 shows W. G. Grace attempting the glide, and apparently he has -hardly moved either leg; presumably, therefore, the ball is not very -short, but only just too short to hit. This is a stroke in which W. G. -Grace excels, as indeed he does in most others; but it is a dangerous -one unless the left elbow is kept well up, for otherwise, if the ball -bumps, you will find your bat sloping backwards and the ball will go up. - -[Illustration: FIG. 10.--‘The glide.’ (W. G. Grace.)] - -We must now think of the proper way to play a ball on the legs that -is not short enough for the batsman to play back to in this way, -though, on the other hand, it cannot be hit to square-leg with a -straight bat. The batsman also, on account of some natural disability, -has always been unable to learn the secret of the George Parr sweep. -This sort of ball must be played forward, and, if necessary, the -batsman may even leave his ground and push it in front of short leg. -As has been said before, if he should miss the ball his legs will save -him from being stumped. The ball must be smothered as far as possible -and pushed on in front of short-leg, and the reason why it is not hit -harder is simply because you cannot quite get at the pitch, and if, -therefore, you hit hard at it, you would probably sky the ball. The -bat must be kept at the proper slope: as the body is lunging forward -a great deal of impetus will be given to the hit by the mere weight -of the body, and the ball will frequently find its way to the ropes. -This play is most useful when opposed to left-handed bowlers, for then -the ball is apt to follow the arm and come straight in the direction -of the batsman’s left hip. The famous trio of Uppingham cricketers, -Messrs. Patterson, Lucas, and D. Q. Steel, were very strong in this -stroke, and in an innings of over a hundred which Mr. Patterson played -at Lord’s in 1876 against Oxford a large proportion of his runs were -made in this way. In ancient days many balls on the leg side used to be -played by a now practically obsolete stroke called the ‘draw,’ which -consisted of an ugly lifting up of the left leg and letting the ball -glide off the bat between the legs towards long-leg. It was as much -part of the _répertoire_ of a player of the old style as a cut or a -drive, but it has utterly gone out of fashion as a stroke to be learnt, -simply because it had no further effect than the glide off the bat as -now practised; the modern style has also the additional advantage of -being more elegant, and there is less chance of the ball hitting the -foot. The famous Jemmy Grundy used frequently to play this stroke, -and his mantle appears to have descended on some younger Nottingham -players, for at the present day they sometimes use it. It used to be -brought off occasionally by the famous Richard Daft, and was in fact -the only stroke of this graceful and most correct player that was not -elegant. As we have now got on the subject of the draw, we may as well -describe the other sort of obsolete draw, which was performed by just -touching the ball with the bat quite straight, but with its left side -turned towards the wicket-keeper, or what soldiers would call left -half-face, held some way behind the body. Tom Hearne used to be great -at this sort of draw, but it is even more entirely gone out of fashion -as a stroke than the other style. The same effect is produced by what -is frequently seen--namely, a batsman only just snicking a ball off the -leg stump, or just touching it, leaving the spectator uncertain whether -the ball has been played or has hit the wicket. Tom Hearne, who was -the last player who used to practise this stroke methodically, was in -the habit of jumping with both feet towards short-leg, and leaving the -bat in the correct position for the draw; and not unfrequently he was -caught at the wicket owing to the ball not being turned sufficiently; -sometimes, though not often, if the bound towards short-leg happened -to be a little too much in front, he used to be stumped. This stroke -necessitated moving the right leg towards short-leg, and it is on this -ground mainly that we contend that it is not sound cricket; but, as has -before been stated, it is now quite obsolete, and to imagine it you -must also imagine yourself in the days of tall hats, pads under the -trousers, and braces holding up a curious type of pantaloon, such as -the late Mr. Burgoyne, treasurer of the M.C.C., used to wear up to the -day of his death. The play shown in fig. 11 is made by drawing back the -left foot, coming hard on to the ball, and forcing it in the direction -of short-leg. In our judgment, this is the right play for all short -balls on the legs, for the ball is near to the body and consequently -to the eye; you have therefore great facility in placing it, and you -have also the bat at a proper angle. It is more correct than the stroke -shown in fig. 10, for there if the ball should bump it will run up the -shoulder of the bat, and possibly get caught by the wicket-keeper, -short-slip, or even point and short-leg, and we have seen several -instances of the ball hitting the bat, not in the front but at the -side of the bat. In the former play the ball has to hit the bat, in -the latter the bat hits the ball, and, according to the fancy of the -batsman, can either be hit in front of short-leg or be suffered to -glide towards very sharp long-leg. The figure, however, does not quite -convey the impression that the ball is being hit hard. The bat may have -descended from over the batsman’s head, especially if the ball is very -short, while the figure only shows the end of the stroke. - -[Illustration: FIG. 11.--Forcing stroke off the legs.] - -The off drive in the direction of cover-point and to the right hand -of point is a favourite hit with many players. Barnes of Nottingham -plays it to perfection. The ball to hit in this way is one well up on -the off side, though it need not be a half-volley. The left foot is -thrown across, the ball is hit with a nearly perpendicular bat, and -the stronger the wrist the cleaner and harder will be the hit. In this -and every other hit correct timing is most important, and whatever the -beginner may try, do not let him attempt to hit wildly at the pitch of -the ball. Let the left foot be put across, and be careful to hit over -the ball in order to keep it down, for if you do not, and the ball -bumps, it will inevitably go up. The ball should be a foot or so wide -of the wicket; the batsman at the moment of striking the ball will be -facing cover-point, and will have his left shoulder well forward, as in -fig. 12. The bat is well over the shoulder, and is coming down nearly -perpendicularly on the ball, which is not a half-volley; if it were, -the bat would be straighter and the ball would be driven straighter. -But the ball is hit after it has gone about a foot from the pitch. If -the ball is a foot or two wide of the wicket and well up it would be -hit in a similar position, for the bat cannot be held straight to hit -a ball at this distance from the wicket; if it should go straight it -would be a pull and not a clean hit, and the further the ball from the -wicket the further ought the left foot to be moved across. Whatever you -do, refrain from hitting a ball when there is reasonable expectation of -the umpire calling ‘Wide.’ You may hit it for two or three runs; you -are more likely only just to touch it with the end of the bat and get -caught by third man or point; you are still more likely to cover it and -not score off it, thereby losing a run for your side. - -[Illustration: CAUGHT AT THE WICKET] - -So completely has the modern method of bowling on the off side for -catches established itself, that cautious players like Donnan and -Abel have got into the habit of leaving off balls altogether alone. -Granted that the bowling is accurate and the fields well placed, county -clubs will very soon find out that, if this course is pursued much -further, cricket will become a very dull game to watch, and a match -will probably seldom lead to a decisive result. It may be done to a -good length ball outside the off stump when you first go in, and have -neither got a good sight of the ball nor the pace of the ground; but -that batsmen should habitually watch the wicket-keeper take the ball -while they stand right in front of the wicket, with their bats behind -them, is carrying caution so far that some people would call it not -a virtue but a vice. We actually saw a cautious player receive four -consecutive off balls and not make an attempt to hit one. What pleasure -can there be in batting if these tactics are adopted? And let such -players please think of the unhappy spectators. The ball can be hit -if you will only get your left foot well across and get well over the -ball, and even if your energies are chiefly directed towards hitting -the ball on the ground, the ball will be hit, and the field may make -a mistake; at any rate you have made an effort, and not given up in -despair. It is like a timid man running away from danger instead of -facing it, as he should, and it is better to try and to fail than not -to try at all. Never mind your average; you cannot win a match by such -tactics, though you may make a draw of it. - -[Illustration: FIG. 12.--Off drive.] - -The off drive by cover-point must be always made by putting the -left leg across, and not the right; and the old principle never to -be departed from, namely, to keep the left shoulder and elbow well -forward, must be again emphasised. When you have once got into position -you are master of the situation: you are right over the ball, and you -may leave it alone if it should bump; or you may wait till the ball -has passed you, and then make the cut with left leg over in the way -described before. You are not in the most favourable attitude for the -cut, because your left leg is too much over, but it can be brought off; -and if only a great deal of practice is given to this off drive there -will be no necessity for leaving balls alone. - -There are several players to whom is denied the ability and capacity -to make these off strokes, who are defective in wrist and careful -timing of the ball, but who are fully capable of taking quite proper -care of a half-volley or balls well up. Such players are under a great -disadvantage when they get balls on the off side that are shorter than -the half-volley, for they certainly cannot take the same advantage of -them. But they have a great many courses open to them, and if they will -get the left leg over, and hit over the ball, they will run no risk of -getting out, and a casual ball will be well timed and hit accordingly. -But they have also the waiting stroke open to them, and this consists -of letting the ball get past them, and simply letting it glide off the -bat in the direction of long-slip. The faster the bowling the more -runs will result from this stroke, as the ball is hit at a longer time -after it has pitched than it is when the batsman meets it by the more -effective method; there is more time to observe its pace and direction; -and if such a player is only careful to get over the ball, he will get -a lot of runs in this way. - -Lastly, there is the hard drive, which partakes largely of forward -play, but yet is a hit to which you can open your shoulders. It is made -with a straight bat either on the off side, on side, or straight over -the bowler’s head. - -To fast bowling the difficulty arises of distinguishing this stroke -from forward play, for so many balls from fast bowlers on hard wickets -are played forward that are not by any means half-volleys and yet go -very hard. In fact, there are occasions when fast grounds and fast -bowling combine to make batting very easy--when, as a well-known -Yorkshire fast bowler said, ‘If you poke at her she goes for four.’ -There is no real necessity for ever having a regular smack at straight -balls from a very fast bowler; it is practically as effective to play -them forward, with the weight of the body thrown on the left foot -and the arms and shoulders kept free and loose. No more beautiful -exponent of this graceful forward play has ever lived than Lionel -Palairet of Somerset. But by all means hit as hard as you possibly -can at a half-volley outside the off stump; the ball will either make -mid-off tremble, or else go straight to the ropes between mid-off and -cover-point. You move the left foot slightly forward a little in front -of the wicket, and you hit at the ball with a straight bat and get -well over it to keep it along the ground. Hold your bat tight, for if -it should turn in your hands there will be a miss-hit and you will be -caught at cover-point or elsewhere. You can hit your hardest at the -half-volley just off the wicket, for the simple reason that if you do -miss the ball you cannot be bowled, and there is no more chance of -missing if you put out your whole strength to it than if you simply -drive it forward with a straight bat. So keep a little reserve of -strength in all straight balls, but to a crooked half-volley put your -whole force into the blow and hit as though you wished to do the ball -an injury. - -About the half-volley on the on side very little need be said. We have -observed before that the ball just outside the leg stump, to within two -or three inches of it, is a ball to drive and not hit to leg. It should -be hit towards mid-on or between the bowler and mid-on; and to apply -what has been said before, hit it as hard as you can, as if you do miss -it you will not be bowled. Keep the right leg still and lunge forward -on to your left foot, which should be a little thrown forward, and hold -the bat tight. - -We have now sufficiently discussed the principles that ought to guide -the young player in playing fast bowling on a good fast wicket, and -if he observes what has been said he will find that he plays a good -safe game, assuming that his eye is straight and that he is able to -put his bat in the place where his eye shows him it ought to go. The -play to fast bowling on slow tricky wickets brings out the batsman’s -real talent, and he will discover that what was easy on a hard wicket -is full of difficulty on a soft. There are no decisive rules to guide -the player on such wickets; he must trust to his eye and capacity for -watching the ball. The player that can watch the ball carefully is the -man who will succeed on slow difficult wickets; and anybody who has -seen Grace, Shrewsbury, and A. G. Steel bat under these circumstances -will understand what this watching the ball means. If the ground is -very fast there is hardly any time for a careful watching of the ball; -the player must play largely by instinct, which will tell him where -the ball is going, and as the wickets nowadays are so very true the -ball will nearly always take a natural course, that is, straight from -the pitch. The left-handed bowler round the wicket will come with -the bowler’s arm slightly from off to leg, the right-handed bowler -also round the wicket from leg to off, but these are both the natural -courses the ball ought to take. On slow wickets, however, the ball will -come slower; it will take all sorts of fantastical turns and twists, -it will get up straight, and sometimes hang or stop a little. It will -generally be found that very fast bowlers do not shine on slow soft -wickets, for they have great difficulty in getting a good foothold. -It is the medium and slow bowlers who revel on such ground, as Briggs -and Giffen can tell you. The batsman will find that he is bound to -play more back and less forward, for it is little good to play forward -unless the ball can be smothered, owing to the extraordinary pranks the -ball will indulge in after it has pitched. He will therefore be found -playing more on his right leg, and the runs will inevitably come much -slower. It has been ascertained by experience that hitters are of more -value on these difficult wickets than sticks; for the latter, though -they may stay in for an hour, will perhaps not get a dozen runs during -that period. The hitter, however, if he brings off four hits, does more -execution in a quarter of an hour than the stick will do in thrice that -time. - -The value of three or four hitters in an eleven was never more -distinctly shown than in the case of the Australian Elevens of 1882 -and 1884, and the Gloucestershire and Cambridge Elevens of 1897. In -the Gloucestershire and Cambridge Elevens of 1897 Jessop’s hitting -has on several occasions turned a match in a quarter of an hour, and -this player certainly has the greatest gift we ever saw of hitting -balls of any and all lengths. The Australian 1882 eleven had four -big hitters--McDonnell, Bonnor, Giffen, and Massie. In the great -international match at the Oval in 1882, Massie got the fifty-five runs -in Australia’s second innings that practically won the match, and to -say he hit at every ball is scarcely an exaggeration. There was also a -match against Yorkshire at Holbeck, where McDonnell’s scores of over -thirty in one innings and over forty in the other certainly won the -match for his side. In 1886 Surrey had to go in to get eighty-seven -runs to win. Abel was playing for an hour and three-quarters, while -Garrett and Evans were bowling, every ball dead on the wicket, and -during that time laboriously compiled thirteen runs. The result of the -match was really very doubtful after the fall of the seventh wicket, -but Jones, a courageous cricketer, seeing what was the right game, -went out and hit Palmer over the ropes for four, and the value of this -hit cannot be exaggerated. As a rule it may be taken for granted that -steady and slow play, useful and good as it is in its way, will not win -matches on slow difficult wickets unless there is a sprinkling of three -or four hitters in the eleven. By the doctrine of chances you will find -that one of the number will come off, and one innings like Massie’s -may win the match. To the player who has any hit in him we therefore -advise the playing of a freer game on slow difficult wickets than on -easy ones. In the latter case runs are bound to come if only you stop -there, but they will not in the former. You may leave your ground even -to fast bowling on slow wickets if you think you can bring off a hit -by so doing, and generally hold the bat nearer the top and give her -the long handle. The defensive player, if he cannot do this, must play -generally back with the weight on the right leg, watch the ball very -carefully, take advantage of any loose ball that may be bowled, and -try and place the ball for singles to short-leg, or in the slips. The -bowlers find it more easy to put on break or curl on soft wickets, -so whereas on hard wickets you may almost assume that the ball will -play no pranks but come on straight, on soft you may almost assume the -contrary. The ball that hangs or stops a bit after pitching instead -of coming on is perhaps the most fatal ball that is bowled. If the -batsman plays forward to such a ball he will very likely find that he -has done playing before the ball has reached his bat; this means that -the bottom of the bat goes on and gets under the ball, and he is caught -and bowled. So frequently does this ball come that it is well not to -play hard on soft wickets, for if the ball hangs at all it must go up -on being hit. For defensive play, we think the bat ought not to be held -at all tightly, but rather slackly, for you cannot get a run by hard -forward play or hard back play on such wickets. - -The general characteristics of play to slow bowling such as that of -Tyler, Peel, Briggs, and others are so very different that we must make -a few special remarks on them. The great amount of slow bowling is a -development of modern times; not that slow round-arm bowling did not -formerly exist, but it certainly did not to anything like the extent -it does now. In the days which we all of us have heard talked about by -old cricketers at Lord’s, when Mynn, Redgate, Hillyer, and Lillywhite -flourished, there were some lob bowlers, notably the famous Wm. Clarke, -but there were few genuine slow round-arm bowlers, and Wm. Lillywhite -had a long stop even when the renowned Tom Box was keeping wicket, as -may be seen in the well-known engraving of the match between Kent and -Sussex played about the year 1840. Coming to later times, from 1860 to -1868, there was, as far as we can gather, but one real professional -slow round-arm bowler, namely, George Bennett. Between 1870 and 1887 -may be said to be the dark age of amateur fast bowling, and to a less -degree of professional. Since that date, however, the amateur fast -bowling has wonderfully improved, and the famous S. M. J. Woods led the -way, and has been followed by Jessop, Jackson, Kortright, Cunliffe, and -others, while the great Richardson, we think, is the best fast bowler -that has ever bowled, when the amount of work and the perfect wickets -are considered. - -From a theoretical point of view, to real slow bowling all forward -play ought to be banished. If the ball is short, play back to it; if it -is tolerably well up there ought to be time to go out and meet it, and -drive it at the pitch. There are some quick-footed players who carry -this theory into practice, but generally, if you observe first-class -cricket, you will find that there are plenty of players who never -leave their ground, even to slow bowling, unless they are really well -set. This partly comes from the great caution which is undoubtedly -exercised more now than it was twenty or thirty years ago, and partly -from the fact that the bowling, though some of it very slow, is not -tossed up so high in the air as it was by Bennett and earlier bowlers. -Peate, for instance, in his prime the best length bowler for the last -twenty years, did not toss the ball at all high in the air, nor did -the renowned Alfred Shaw, the most accurate bowler that ever lived. -But we still think that more running in might be practised, for there -is nothing that more completely demoralises a bowler than a player who -comes out and drives when the ball is at all over-pitched. We have seen -slow bowlers who do not possess much head completely demoralised by a -quick-footed player like Mr. A. G. Steel. They preserve their dignity -by bowling so short, that though maiden overs might abound wickets -certainly would not fall. Let the cricketer, when playing to slow -bowling, stand a little easier, in order that, when he has made up his -mind to meet the ball, his right foot will not be rooted to the ground, -as it ought to be when playing to fast bowling on fast wickets. Fig. 13 -shows Shrewsbury going out to drive, but he is evidently only at the -beginning of his jump, and by the time the bat has got over the ball he -will be a couple of yards outside the crease. Remember, if you are to -be stumped, you may as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb. You -are equally out if you are an inch or ten yards out of your ground, so -never hesitate to go out as far as you can in order to make the hit a -certainty, and if you can hit the ball full-pitch by all means do so, -as you ought never to miss a full-pitch. You can also pull a full-pitch -to leg or anywhere on the on side where fieldsmen are scarce, and it is -a sign that for that particular occasion the bowler is defeated if the -batsman has not permitted the ball to touch the ground. - -[Illustration: FIG. 13.--Running out to drive. (Shrewsbury.)] - -If you find, on going out to hit a ball, that it is too short, and -you cannot get at the pitch of it, you have several courses open to -you. If you are a very big hitter, and the field is not very far out, -it is worth while to try the experiment of hitting as hard as you can; -the ball must go high, and may go over the ropes or out of harm’s way; -indeed, some great hitters seem to prefer a ball that is not quite a -half-volley. Mr. C. I. Thornton, the biggest hitter the world has ever -beheld, with the exception of G. J. Bonnor and perhaps Lyons, has made -his longest hits off such balls as these; while Bonnor, who possesses -a prodigious reach, seldom leaves his ground at all, and constantly -sends the ball out of the ground by hitting short of the actual pitch. -If the ball is smothered it cannot go up in the air, and though it is -more correct cricket to get over the ball and drive it forward, as -Shrewsbury and A. G. Steel do, it is probable that the great hitters -would lose more than they gained by playing the orthodox game. There -is a golden rule to be carefully remembered in playing slows, and that -is, never to run out to a ball that is well outside the off stump. -We do not mean to bar the player from running out to a ball which is -absurdly over-pitched, and which he is certain to get full-pitch if -he goes out; but he should not leave his ground to the half-volley -unless it is nearly straight. There is more than one reason for this. -In the first place, if you miss the ball, it is the easiest sort for -the wicket-keeper to take, and any moderately decent wicket-keeper -will certainly have you out. In the second place, an off ball is one -that it is impossible to hit or play with a straight bat, and if you -run out to slows you ought always to hit thus; and this rule is sound -even when you run out to a ball on your legs, for that is generally -hit to long-on with a straight bat, and not to leg. It is generally -true that you should never leave your ground to any ball that may be -called crooked, whether it is to leg or to the off, for in either case -you run a serious risk of being stumped; it is only straight or nearly -straight balls that you ought to meet by going out of your ground. The -modern slow bowler is so very accurate that he very rarely bowls on the -leg side at all, and the old-fashioned lobber who used to bowl on the -leg side with a twist from leg and have four or five fields on the leg -side is gradually disappearing. The ball that in nineteen cases out of -twenty you have to meet by going out of your ground is, therefore, the -straight ball. - -As far as lobs are concerned, you can play them by stopping in your -ground; but the really good player to lobs runs out to a certainty -when the ball is overpitched, and the famous Wm. Clarke used to say -that Pilch played him best, as he used to wait his opportunity and -meet him and run him down with a straight bat. If you come to reason -out the theory of batting to slows, and think how you can best defend -your wicket and best score off such bowling, you will easily satisfy -yourself that by playing back and gently forward you may ensure safety -for a considerable period, but you cannot score even moderately fast. -The ball does not come up to the bat fast off the ground as in fast -bowling, and if you play forward hard you run the enormous risk of -being caught and bowled or caught at mid off. In other words, while -to fast bowling you play forward to get runs, to slow bowling you -play forward to defend your wicket. If, therefore, you play the -extra-cautious game and stick in your ground, or from some cause or -another are unable ever to ‘give her the rush,’ you will not be able -to score except by casual singles, unless you wait and fully avail -yourself of a full pitch or an outrageous long hop, relished, and often -obtained, when amateurs are bowling, but very seldom delivered in -first-class matches, and practically never by professional players. - -It is difficult to know what to do with the good length off ball. -It is much harder to cut slow bowling than fast: greater strength -of wrist is wanted, and there are many players who are unable to do -more than merely pat the ball towards third man for a single or two -runs. Slow bowlers have a great fancy for bowling without a field at -third man, and this is to the advantage of the batsman; but even if -there is a third man, at any rate he cannot cover more than a certain -amount of ground, and you will find that many a run may be got by the -pat. Mind and get over the ball, and you cannot then come to grief -by being caught at third man or short-slip, and very rarely by the -wicket-keeper. The bumping ball ought to be left alone; this sort of -ball is the only one in meeting which prudence is the better part of -valour, and no attempt ought to be made to hit at all. The old Adam -within them forces a great many players to try and hit, but it is -almost a certainty that if the ball is hit it must be from underneath, -and up in the air it will consequently go. On a soft slow wicket any -run getting to good slow bowling is extremely difficult, but even on -such wickets you will lose nothing and gain the casual single by the -pat. - -The good length ball on the off side is the modern batsman’s bugbear, -but it is far easier to play when the bowling is fast than when it is -slow. It is easier to cut in the first instance, and there are seldom -so many fields on the off side to the fast bowler. But the slow ball -can be and ought to be driven along the ground if the batsman gets -well over it, times it correctly, and throws the left leg across in -the same way as we explained in describing the proper method of making -this stroke off fast bowling. It is more difficult to time good slow -bowling, when the bowler is continually altering his pace, than fast, -and herein lies the difficulty of hitting these off balls. Bear in -mind, however, that by keeping well over the ball you practically run -no risk of being caught anywhere; sooner or later you will get your eye -in, and when that desirable consummation is accomplished, you will be -astonished to find how safely you will hit many balls that when you are -looking on it seems impossible to hit without incurring considerable -danger. But nothing can be gained by leaving balls alone; you run the -minimum of risk by hitting at them, if only you observe the two rules -which ought to be hung in your bedroom and branded into your brain, -‘Put the left leg over,’ and ‘Get on the top of the ball.’ Above all -things do not play for a draw. - -From what has been said on the principles which govern the proper -playing of fast and slow bowling, the reader may be led to think that -slow bowling is far more difficult to play successfully than fast. -_Chacun à son goût_ is true, no doubt, but we are inclined to think -that, to the majority of players in the prime of their play, slow -bowling is on the whole more difficult to play, especially on hard -wickets. Take the case of W. G. Grace. It was almost a waste of time on -hard wickets to put on fast bowlers when Mr. Grace was at his best. The -sole advantage to be derived from so doing arose from the fact that it -was advisable to distract his eye, and for this purpose a fast bowler -was useful. By this we mean that, when slow bowlers were on at both -ends, his eye would become more accustomed to the pace of the ground, -and in a shorter time than it would have been if a fast bowler had been -on at one end. But the fast bowler was on mainly to enable the slow -bowler to get him out, and if the reader looks at Mr. Grace’s enormous -scores of twenty years back he will find that Shaw, Southerton, Peate, -and Lillywhite got him out a dozen times to the fast bowlers’ once. And -the runs that came from bowlers like Martin McIntyre were astonishing; -anywhere, cuts, pushes through any number of short-legs, big drives and -colossal leg hits--all were alike to the great batsman. - -On soft wickets, though many think otherwise, we believe that fast or -medium-paced bowling is more difficult. This must be assumed only in -the case of those fast bowlers who have power to keep their precision -and pace on slow wickets, like Morley and Richardson. The variety of -wickets, as is shown in the chapter on Bowling, is very great, and on -the real mud farmyard sort of wicket it is generally safe to presume -that fast bowlers cannot act. When there is a slight drizzling rain, -which keeps the ball and surface of the ground wet, fast bowlers -flounder about like porpoises, and the only bowlers who can act at all -are the slow, though they are very much handicapped. But on the real -bowler’s wicket, soft, yet gradually hardening by the effect of the -sun, _cæteris paribus_, the fast or fast medium bowler will, as a rule, -be the most deadly. The year 1879 was, on the whole, the wettest year -for cricket that the present generation has seen, and it is instructive -to turn to the result of the season’s bowling for the county of -Nottingham. This county possessed in Alfred Shaw and Morley the two -best bowlers in England--one slow, the other fast. Here is the analysis -of each for Nottingham:-- - - Overs Maidens Runs Wickets Average - Morley 725 349 867 89 9·66 - Shaw 794 453 651 62 11·31 - -It will be seen from this pair of analyses that Morley’s is slightly -better all round than Shaw, with the exception of the number of -maiden overs. But maiden overs are not the final goal of the bowler’s -ambition. They are only means to an end. The true bowler’s one idea -is to get wickets. The reader will note that Morley, the fast bowler, -got no fewer than twenty-seven wickets more than Shaw, which more than -makes up for the latter’s greater success in bowling maidens. The year -1879 was doubtless a great year for bowlers, but none the less we doubt -whether, taking a whole season’s work for a county, this record has -ever been surpassed by any _pair_ of bowlers at any time, and it is as -good an illustration of the truth of our theory that in wet years slow -bowlers are not likely to succeed so well as fast or medium-pace. - -It has always appeared to us that the reason why real slow bowling is -slightly less deadly than fast or medium on slow wickets is simply that -the batsman is more at the mercy of the eccentricities of the ground -when playing to the latter class of bowling than when playing to the -former. He always has the power, if he would only exercise it, of -leaving his ground to balls of a certain length from the slow bowler, -and smothering them. And again let the beginner lay this axiom to -heart: the ground can commit no devilry if the ball is smothered at the -pitch. On slow wickets, therefore, to slow bowling leave your ground -with even less hesitation than on fast, and argue in this way, that as -life against these bowlers and on this wicket is certain to be a short -one, therefore it had better be a merry one for the sake of the score. - -There are and have been a few great men with the bat who obey no -law, but possess that strange indefinable gift called genius, which -rises superior to any difficulty of ground or bowling; these batting -luminaries may play their ordinary game on slow difficult wickets, and -their genius enables them to do what ordinary mortals cannot. On really -difficult wickets Shrewsbury shone, and on the whole he has proved -himself the best player the world has ever seen on caking, difficult, -soft wickets. But let the ordinary player, who has acquired a certain -amount of skill in batting, remember that cricket on hard and fast -wickets and cricket on slow are two quite different things, and that -he must alter his game to suit the circumstances. The very fast-footed -bookish sort of player is the one who is most at sea on soft wickets; -and this last bit of advice we respectfully urge upon him--that one -hit for four and out next ball will probably be of more value to his -side than twenty minutes’ careful defence and no run. It is not on soft -wickets that drawn games are played, unless there is rain after the -match has begun; it is on dry wickets, with boundaries close in, that -the plethora of runs makes the game dull to all except the ignorant -spectator and the voracious batsman. Of course, if there is only a -short time left before the drawing of stumps and conclusion of the -match, say an hour and a half or two hours, it may be of importance to -play for a draw; then the twenty-minutes-without-a-run batsman may be -the means of salvation for his side, as Louis Hall has proved to be -more than once for Yorkshire; but, except under such circumstances, -the hitter who runs a certain risk for the sake of a hit is the more -valuable man. - -A few words now on running. A man is out if run out as decisively -as if his middle stump is knocked down; but being run out is more -annoying than being bowled, so everybody ought to learn how to run. -Some fieldsmen are so renowned for their throwing and rapidity of -movement that when such a man is going for the ball the batsman will -not venture on a run which, under ordinary circumstances, he might -safely make. In any event do not run if you feel any doubt of its -safety. The first invariable rule is that the striker calls the run -if the ball is hit in front of the wicket. This is simple to remember -and there is no exception unless it be when the ball is hit to third -man under certain circumstances. These circumstances refer to the -fieldsman himself. If the third man knows his business and throws to -the bowler, the striker has to run the risk; therefore he ought to -call. If the third man is a player of tradition and always throws to -the wicket-keeper, the non-striker is in danger, but if he is backing -up he never will be run out. All hits behind the wicket--except in -the case above mentioned--must be called by the non-striker, and the -striker must not look at the ball after he has hit it, but at the -non-striker. The man who has not to judge the run must have a simple -childlike faith in the judgment of his partner, and if he gets run out -he may remonstrate gently with him afterwards with good reason. The man -who is receiving the ball can easily get into the habit of watching -it after it has passed him on its way to the long-stop or if he has -hit it to long-slip; but this is a bad habit, and if indulged in will -result in the two batsmen holding different ideas as to whether a run -can be got or not, on which subject there must be no difference of -opinion. If the batsman to whom rightly belongs the call shouts ‘run,’ -and his colleague shouts ‘no,’ unless one gives way promptly there may -be a crisis at hand. Never do batsmen look so foolish as when they -affectionately meet at the same wicket, and nothing is so maddening to -the supporters of a side as to see a good batsman well set deliberately -lose his wicket by the folly of either his colleague or himself. If -batsmen will only remember that the decision of the run must rest with -one man, and that his call must be obeyed at once, there will not be -many runs out. When, say, the third run is being made, and the question -whether a fourth can be successfully attempted arises, that batsman who -has to run to the wicket nearest the ball ought to call. The reason -of this is, that as the ball is a considerable way from the nearest -wicket it is almost certain to be thrown there, and the batsman who -calls ought to be he who runs the risk. We will give the following -rules to be remembered by every cricketer with regard to running. (1) -The striker must call every time when the ball is hit in front of the -wicket. (2) The non-striker must call every run when the ball is hit -behind the wicket, except in the case of hits to third man as mentioned -above. (3) Whoever has to shout, let him shout loudly; there is no -penalty attaching to a yell, and it is comforting to a man to know his -colleague’s intention without any doubt. (4) If a bye is being run, -the striker must run straight down the wicket, as he may be saved from -being run out by the ball hitting his head instead of the wicket, for -which mercy he ought to be duly thankful. (5) On all other occasions -run wide of the wicket so as not to cut it up. (6) Always run for a -catch if sent reasonably high into the air; if it is caught no harm is -done to you, and to be missed and to secure a run in one and the same -hit is a veritable triumph. (7) Run the first run as hard as you can, -and turn quickly after grounding your bat within the popping crease, -for the fieldsman may bungle even the easiest ball, and it is never -safe to assume that there can be no second run. - -We hope that we have now explained the true principles of batting to -guide the youthful player in his path. One other word of caution. A -young cricketer may go to Lord’s and watch a great match; he may see -the giants of the game perform--MacLaren, Ranjitsinhji, Jackson, and -Palairet. He will wonder and admire, but let him beware of imitation, -which may lead him into innumerable quagmires. In another walk of -life, literature, you will find facetious writers who are fond of -imitating the style of famous authors, and very amusing the attempts -sometimes are; but it is easily seen that the points they successfully -imitate are the roughnesses and eccentricities which are frequently -characteristic of great authors. An imitator of Carlyle, for instance, -revels in the brusque eccentricities of the great man’s style, but he -never succeeds in portraying his noble qualities. It is much the same -in cricket: genius defies imitation, and is only by poor struggling -humanity to be admired. In the prime of his play nothing in cricket -was grander than the sight of W. G. Grace scoring two runs off a ball -that any other cricketer would have been only too happy to stop. No -school coach that understood his business would tell a youth to play -certain balls as they are played by Mr. A. G. Steel, who sometimes -adopts the most daring methods, and it is not safe to infer that -anybody else in the world can play in a like manner. It is so with -hitting. Bonnor, Lyons, O’Brien, Ford, and Jessop can hit many balls -which the great majority of other cricketers would only venture to play -gently forward. Some critics who are great at criticism, but great -at nothing else, have been known to shake their heads at some of the -methods of great players; but we can assure these gentlemen that real -genius admits no more of criticism than it does of imitation. The four -never-to-be-violated rules previously mentioned need not trouble the -genius at all; no human law need concern him: he is a law to himself, -and looks down from a lofty eminence on his weaker brethren. What is -the good of telling A. G. Steel not to move out of his ground to fast -bowling, seeing that he does so constantly, and gets four runs by a -fine hit when he ‘gives her the rush’? He will not heed you; and why -should he? - -Apart altogether from the natural accuracy and quickness of hand and -eye, without a proper allowance of which labour will be in vain, a -great deal depends on the temperament of each player. Whether failure -is owing to health, to inability to recover elasticity of spirits -after a few defeats, or to some other cause, it is impossible to say. -But let the good player who goes through a whole month, or perhaps -even a season, with very bad luck, and comes out in the end with a bad -average, comfort himself with this reflection, that not only have good -players had these reverses, but even the very best. Mr. W. G. Grace -must be accustomed to hear and see his name referred to, but even he -has had spells of bad luck, and he will, we are sure, excuse us if we -put in full the following figures of innings which were played when he -was in his prime:-- - - _June 15 and 16, 1871._--_Gloucestershire_ v. _Surrey_. - c. R. Humphrey, b. Street 1 - - _June 19 and 20, 1871._--_M.C.C._ v. _Cambridge University_. - c. Ward, b. Bray 4 - c. Thornton, b. Bray 4 - - _June 22 and 23, 1871._--_M.C.C._ v. _Oxford University_. - c. and b. Butler 15 - - _June 29 and 30, 1871._--_Gentlemen of South_ v. _Players of South_. - c. Lillywhite, b. Southerton 4 - b. Lillywhite 11 - -These figures show how the mighty do sometimes fall, and this certainly -ought to console those in the humbler walks of the cricket world. Some -players have shot up like rockets, played for a season or so, and then -have been heard of no more; but the county that plays a series of -county matches will act unwisely if it shunts a player who has shown -that he possesses real batting ability. Of course there are limits to -the patience of every club committee, but all committees would be wise -if they were to err on the side of leniency in this matter. - -It is of very little avail writing any sort of homily on nervousness, -which is in the constitution, and cannot be got rid of by much or any -reading. It is common to all, in greater or less degree, and if any -man tells you that he does not know what nervousness in cricket is, -do not believe him. To say that there is no sensation other than a -distinctly pleasant one in walking to the wickets is absurd. It is true -that nervousness does not appear to affect the play of some batsmen, -who on first going in seem to be playing their ordinary game. But the -sensation is there, and these are the fortunate men whose play suffers -but little in consequence. - -Nervous players must try and reason to the effect that they are -sometimes in the habit of making runs, and that therefore there is no -great presumption on their part if they assume that the chances are -they will do so again. They must also remember that, after all, cricket -is but a game, and no moral disgrace will attach to them if they -fail. These are but poor consolations at the best, but the game is so -glorious that, as we have before remarked, it is better to try and to -fail than never try at all. - -It has always been assumed that the crack English Eleven that failed -to make the necessary seventy-nine runs against the Australians in -1882 were nervous because they did not succeed in making them. We are -not sure that they all were, or that there was more nervousness than -usual; but the wicket was difficult, the Australians’ fielding superb, -and their bowling extraordinarily good. Certainly two or three of the -Englishmen were nervous, and no eleven could be got together anywhere -to play such an important match without this being the case. But the -longer anyone plays the less nervous will he become, and the fortunate -men in cricket are those, like the famous Tom Emmett of Yorkshire, who -can, as he modestly said, ‘bowl a bit sometimes.’ The player who plays -only because he is a good bat, and never bowls after he has laid his -duck egg, has no opportunity of retrieving his character by getting -four or five wickets with the ball. The unhappy batsman makes one bad -stroke and his wicket is lost, and he has possibly no further chance in -the match. But though the bowler may bowl a wide one ball he may take a -wicket the next, and we believe that these all-round players find more -enjoyment in cricket than the man who only bats. To their credit be it -said that at no previous period have the professionals combined the -two more than they do now, and we congratulate Peel, Briggs, Attewell, -Rawlin, Davidson, Hirst, and Wainwright accordingly. - -The obvious advice to give to players whose success depends mainly on -health is to implore them to look after and pay great respect to the -laws by which health is regulated. Not to eat and drink too much, great -though the temptation may be to do both, is a rule that ought to be -observed by cricketers; but there is another, not so obvious, but of -great importance, and that is, avoid sitting up late at night. There is -such a lot of cricket in these days that some amateurs and a great many -professionals play six days in the week. There is the corresponding -amount of travelling to be got through, and a lot of fatigue to be -undergone; sleep, therefore, must not be neglected, and long hours -devoted to convivial evenings not only entail loss of health but loss -of runs also. It is a curious and unwholesome feature of the present -day that it is judged expedient to have enormous meals in the middle -of the day, with salmon, forced meats, creams, jellies, champagne, and -everything calculated to disturb digestion and pervert the sight. This -meal is not only the cause of much indigestion, but also of a gross -waste of time. Instead of half an hour being taken up by the legitimate -luncheon, a precious hour is stolen from the middle of the day. It must -be said that on the principal public grounds there is no reason to -complain of the luncheons: excess is more the custom on private grounds. - -As we have in this chapter implored captains of elevens to be merciful -to good players who may happen to be out of luck, so now, in justice -to the other side of the question, let us beg the batsman not to be -superstitious. - -Superstitions abound in most games, but we have no objection to -examples of the weakness which cause inconvenience to nobody except the -possessor. We have heard, for instance, of a really great player who -never goes in to bat in a match with anything new about him, not even -a shoe-lace; but such superstitions are harmless. There is, however, -the man who has got it into his head, or possibly has dreamt, that it -is quite impossible for him to score if he goes in first or fifth, or -in some particular place; consequently the unhappy captain, after he -has written out, with great care, an order of going in, is bothered and -worried by men who begin to make excuse. One is certain that he cannot -score if he goes in first, another thinks he ought not to be put so low -down as eighth, and so on. Our advice to the captain is to care for -none of these things; let him use his own judgment and not consider the -absurd whims and eccentricities of nervous batsmen. The responsibility -of managing a match is quite enough anxiety and trouble for him without -being bothered by a mutinous eleven, and we entreat batsmen to obey -without murmuring their captain’s orders, and go in without grumbling. - -The rules of cricket are imperfectly understood even by some -reputedly famous umpires; it may be well, therefore, to remind batsmen -how many ways there are of getting out. They know what it is to be -bowled out, caught out, stumped, run out, to get out leg before wicket, -or to hit wicket; and a great many think that nothing else will get -them out. This is a mistake, and it was a comical sight to see, as we -saw some years ago, a first-rate professional diddled out in another -way. It is against the rules, properly understood, to wilfully hit the -ball twice. The rule runs: ‘The batsman is out if the ball be struck -... and he wilfully strike it again, except it be done for the purpose -of guarding his wicket.’ But if a batsman plays a ball and a proper -interval elapses the ball is dead, and he may return the ball to the -bowler. The old rule reads: ‘if the striker touch or take up the ball -while in play.’ In the case alluded to, Barlow was batting in a North -and South match at Lord’s. He hit the ball twice, and, unfortunately -for him, started to run. This starting to run proved the more or less -wilful nature of the act. There was a roar of ‘How’s that?’ from the -colossal throat of W. G. Grace, standing at point; it was a case -of ‘You’ll have to go, Barlow,’ and naturally, in a somewhat moody -manner, Barlow went to the pavilion. It is absurd to say that there -was anything unfair in this; he violated a distinct rule of cricket. -A lot of players think that the ball must not be hit twice under any -circumstances, and they would as soon think of touching a red-hot coal -as hitting the ball a second time. If there is no wicket-keeper and -the ball is played dead against the foot, it may save a few seconds -of time if the batsman shove the ball back to the bowler with his bat -and stand still, thus saving point the trouble of picking the ball up -and returning it. The ball while ‘in play’ must never be picked up by -the hand, for handling the ball wilfully loses a wicket as much as -having two stumps knocked down. It is an easy rule to remember, and -is very rarely broken, but still it is a rule that must be observed. -Obstructing the field is another violation of rule for which the -extreme penalty is exacted. Of course a witness may tell an untruth in -the witness-box, but unless it is spoken wilfully it is not perjury. So -it is with obstructing the field. Many hundreds of times has a batsman -standing in his ground prevented a wicket-keeper from catching him out; -the mere fact that the player’s body, being in a certain position, -forces the wicket-keeper to run round him instead of straight at the -ball will make an uppish ball as unreachable as the sun. The fieldsman -is obstructed, but not wilfully, so no penalty is incurred. But if the -batsman were to hit up a ball to point, for instance, and either strike -at the ball with his bat or wilfully baulk the fieldsman in any way, he -would be out, and deservedly so. In this, as in other like matters, the -umpire must be the sole judge, and it ought to be pretty plain and easy -for him to give a right decision. About twenty years ago the well-known -Cambridge University cricketer, Mr. C. A. Absalom, playing for his -University against Surrey, was running a bye, and whilst running to -the opposite wicket the ball hit his bat, possibly preventing him from -being run out. The umpire gave him out; but the umpire was wrong, for -the ball came from behind him, and as it was never alleged that he -looked to see the course the ball was taking and then interposed his -bat, it was obviously impossible that he could have wilfully obstructed -the ball: it merely chanced that while running in towards the wicket -the ball by accident hit his bat. We do not mean to imply that the -batsman ought to run wide of the wicket to a short run in order to give -the fieldsman every chance of running him out; on the contrary, if a -short bye is to be run, we advise the batsman to run straight down the -wicket, for then, as pointed out elsewhere, the ball will very likely -hit him and prevent him being run out. But he must not deliberately get -in the way of the ball or in any way contribute to the fact of the ball -hitting him. A case of wilful obstruction ought easily to be detected -by any decent umpire. - -It is amusing to ask experienced cricketers in how many ways it is -possible for a man to be got out at cricket, and it is astonishing -to find many who give most absurd answers. There are nine distinct -ways of getting out--(1) bowled; (2) caught; (3) stumped; (4) leg -before wicket; (5) hit wicket; (6) run out; (7) handling the ball; -(8) obstructing the field; (9) hitting ball twice. It is well to know -these facts, for the batsman who gets out in an untoward and unusual -way feels himself to be a fool, and generally looks like one. Mr. -Alfred Lyttelton, when playing some years ago for Cambridge University -Eleven against M.C.C. at Lord’s, got back to a slow long hop and with -his foot just touched the leg stump, the bail of which did not at once -fall off. Oblivious of this fact, and only conscious that he had caught -the ball in the middle of the bat and sent it far away, off he started -for his runs with radiancy on his face and a mocking smile on his -lips. No less than five runs were run, and not until then did anyone -except the wicket-keeper notice that the leg bail, after hanging on a -frail basis for a few seconds, had fallen off. The appeal was made and -the facts examined, the deadly verdict was given, and it was a case -of a return to the pavilion. The batsman on such occasions as these -may look pleasant; but that is only one of the beneficent results of -civilisation, for, as a matter of fact, he feels extremely bitter, -and there are innumerable swords in his heart. In the case mentioned -the unhappy batsman felt hot and out of breath after his exertions in -running the five runs, and there was a sad reversal of the pleasant -feelings that attend a successful hit--the applause of the crowd was -all wasted, the expected increase to the score was not realised, all -had vanished, and a melancholy man walked drearily to the dressing-room. - -Batting may be called the most enjoyable feature of the great and -glorious game of cricket. A man even in full training invariably -feels the effect of fatigue after bowling sixty or seventy overs, and -fieldsmen go through the same experience during a long outing. But -it may with truth be said that the keen pleasure which is realised -by every cricketer worthy of the name, while he is actually at the -wickets, prevents him from feeling fatigue as an inconvenience until -the innings is over. We do not believe, though with bated breath let -it be said, that the fine rider on a fine horse in a good position -and over a grass country with a burning scent can feel so supremely -content with the world and its glorious surroundings while galloping -and jumping close to hounds, as does a batsman who feels himself -master of the bowling on a good wicket in a first-class match, with a -fine day and a large crowd keenly anxious for his well-doing. He is -conscious that his side is gaining a glorious victory by his efforts, -and life can give him no prouder moments. To the young cricketer let us -therefore say, in conclusion, that, as the pleasure is so intense and -the excitement so keen, he should strive to attain proficiency by care, -practice, and the advice of great masters. Above all, he must cultivate -the moral qualities that of necessity must have a place in such a -great, glorious, and unsurpassable game as cricket. - -[Illustration: FIG. 14.--Gunn playing forward.] - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -BOWLING: BY A. G. STEEL. - -[Illustration: ‘The demon bowler.’] - - -Everyone who knows anything at all about cricket will at once admit -that bowling is, to say the least, as important a feature of the game -as batting. The same share of fame has always been conferred on a -really good bowler as on an expert at the other great branch of the -game; but, though this has been so from the very earliest days of -cricket, there is no doubt that the number of good bowlers whose names -figure in the chronicles of the game is much smaller than the number -of good batsmen. This would seem to show that the art of bowling is -more difficult of attainment than its sister accomplishment, and in -face of this supposition, it seems strange that the energy devoted to -practising bowling by all beginners at the game should be so greatly -exceeded by that devoted to batting. The reason for this may easily -be found in the fact that the pleasure derived from making a long -score, and the indescribable feelings of delight experienced by every -keen cricketer when he has a bat in his hand, seem to offer greater -attractions than the more sober, less flashy, and apparently more -mechanical duties of a bowler. It is a great pity, in the interests -of the game, that at our large public schools and universities more -care is not taken to coach beginners in bowling. Hours upon hours are -devoted to the teaching of batting, but it is very, very seldom any -professional ever thinks of endeavouring to instil into his pupils any -of the most elementary rules of bowling. - -A question which cannot fail to present itself to the minds of all -cricketers, and especially those who recollect some of the heroes -of bygone days, is whether the bowling of to-day is as good as it -used to be. This particular question--so often put, and answered so -differently--seems to me to be one which it is impossible to decide, -as the whole nature of the game has altered so much in the last few -years. This alteration is due, firstly, to the great improvement in the -condition of the grounds; secondly, to the corresponding improvement -in batting, for ‘the better the grounds the better the batsmen,’ is -generally a correct saying. Formerly bowlers were greatly assisted by -the unevenness of the grounds; whereas now, on our billiard-table-like -wickets, even our very best bowlers know well that their chance of -getting rid of a strong batting side for anything under 300 runs is -extremely remote. It is impossible to compare the tall-hatted old -heroes of the ball with bowlers of the present day. In olden days -the badness of the grounds caused the best batsman’s wicket to be in -frequent jeopardy, and fast erratic bowlers were well aware that there -would be ample compensation for any accuracy which might be wanting -in their delivery in the far from infrequent shooters and abruptly -rising balls which so often either levelled the stumps or compelled -the retirement of the batsman by a catch in the slips. Nowadays a -bowler is nothing unless he has command of the ball and can practise -variety: batting is so good and grounds are so level that the merely -accurate bowler may keep down runs, but he cannot get wickets, but this -fact is hardly realised yet, and our best bowlers--and these consist -almost exclusively of the professional class--seem to aim not so much -at getting rid of a batsman as at keeping down the runs by bowling a -good even straight length, and trusting to chance or the impatience of -the batsman for his dismissal. As, however, this subject is one which -will best be treated later on, and about which there is a good deal to -be said, we will leave it for the present, and turn our attention to a -short retrospect of bowling from the earliest days. - -Round-arm bowling seems to have come into vogue in 1825. It has been -generally supposed that Mr. Willes was the first to start it, and the -following story is told of the way in which that gentleman found out -the advantages of the round-arm delivery. Mr. Willes, being a most -enthusiastic cricketer, and not content with the summer months for his -favourite sport, used in the winter daily to repair to his barn, and -there measure out the proper distance, pitch the stumps, and, with -his sister (also an enthusiast) as bowler, enjoy a good practice. Now -everyone who has seen ladies attempting to throw a stone or cricket -ball will remember that they invariably have a half-round, half-under -sort of delivery, and this Miss Willes, in common with the majority -of ladies, seems to have possessed. Her brother, accustomed to play -against what in those days was the only known style of bowling, viz. -under-arm, was somewhat perplexed and worried with this unknown -feminine species of ball, which doubtless he found difficult to tackle. -How amusing it would have been to have watched this keen cricketer, -probably not unconscious of his own merits as a batsman, entirely -puzzled by the deliveries of a lady! We are not told whether his -feelings of shame at being thus defeated, or of delight at discovering -this new style of bowling, predominated, but we _are_ told that shortly -afterwards he made his _début_ as a round-arm bowler, and met with -(until he was stopped by the conservatism of the crowd) the greatest -success. - -From the year 1825 down to the present, round-arm bowling has been -universal, and it is now quite an exceptional occurrence to come -across a fast under-arm bowler of the old style. This is not much to -be regretted, as every attribute of good bowling which was obtainable -by the fast under-arm delivery is much more easy of attainment by -the round or over-arm style; and many accomplishments pertaining to -the bowler’s art are possible to the round-arm which, from the very -nature of the action, are impossible to the fast under-arm bowler. -Break, spin, and quickness from the pitch are common to both styles, -but certainly the two latter are made easier of acquirement by the -round-arm style; and with regard to break--an easier matter for the -under-arm bowler--the ball that breaks or twists the most is not -as a rule the ball that gets the most wickets. To a fast under-arm -bowler the variations in flight and pace, so well known to the best -round-arm bowlers, are unknown. Slow under-arm bowling, of course, -must be excepted from these remarks; later on in this chapter I shall -have something to say on the subject of this most useful style, which -unfortunately in later years seems almost to have died out. - -It was formerly the reproach of amateurs that from the year 1875 to, -say, 1887 they had no bowlers. When Appleby and Buchanan retired from -first-class cricket in 1875, there was practically nobody except Grace -and Studd to carry on the lamp of amateur bowling till Woods, Jackson, -Kortright, Streatfeild, Wells, Bull, Jessop, Cunliffe, and Wilson by -their pace and accuracy have shown the public what can be done. Woods, -Kortright, Jackson, and Jessop for pace, Bull and Wells for slow, and -Cunliffe and Wilson for medium are all excellent in their respective -classes, and in the sixties, when the grounds would have given them -more assistance, they would have been far more deadly than now. Still -it is a fact that at most public schools more teaching ought to be -bestowed upon bowling. A few words of instruction or encouragement to -a beginner might have the effect of awakening in him the interest and -keenness about bowling which would eventually cause his development -into a good, or at any rate a fairish bowler. Who has not seen over and -over again a boy come up to a net where a companion is practising, and -picking up a ball, which as likely as not is about half as large again -as a match ball, proceed to hammer away at the batsman for about ten -minutes or more in all directions, with all pitches, and, what is worse -than everything, with different lengths of run? Then, perhaps, getting -a little tired, as any bowler will who bowls for long without a rest -(which he would get in a match at the end of each over), he exclaims, -‘Now I’ll give you some of Spofforth’s patents!’ and then, with a long -run and a kangaroo-like bound (but, probably, altogether unlike the -famous Australian bowler), he proceeds to hurl the ball wider and in a -more erratic style than ever. Then, perhaps, he will say, ‘Would you -like some of W. G.’s?’ and immediately assuming the well-known and -somewhat inartistic pose of the English champion, proceed to toss the -ball lifeless up in the air. Now this is not the way to learn how to -bowl. Bowling, like everything else worth doing, takes a lot of careful -practice before it can be expected to meet with success. - -There can be no doubt that were boys carefully trained at school in -the art of bowling, as they are in that of batting, our universities, -from which the ranks of our first-class cricketers are usually -replenished, would be continually sending up men who could take the -position as leading bowlers now occupied by professionals. But, it -may be asked, if we have a supply of fairly good bowlers, what does -it matter whether they are professionals or amateurs? There are two -answers to this question: first, that the Gentlemen every year play -the Players, and are naturally always anxious to beat them; and, -secondly, that the more cricket gets into the hands of professional -players, the worse it will be for the game and its reputation. We -would not say one word against the personal character of the English -professional cricketer, for the great majority of this class are -honest, hard-working, and sober men. We only say that it is not in -the interests of cricket that any branch of the game should be left -entirely in their hands. Your professional, as a rule, is the son of -a small tradesman, or person in that rank of life, and has been born -in a neighbourhood where the greatest interest is taken in sport of -all kinds, cricket during the summer months being sedulously played. -These neighbourhoods are far more frequent in the northern than the -southern counties, the sporting tendencies of the people of Lancashire, -Yorkshire, and Nottingham being developed to a much greater extent -than in the more southern shires. These three counties, and especially -Notts, turn out large quantities of young professionals yearly. - -A boy who has been born in one of these cricketing districts is sure to -devote a fair share of his time to watching the victories and defeats -of his village club, and consequently to imbibing that feeling of -‘pleasing madness’ connected with the game which attacks every cricket -enthusiast. The height of his ambition is to bowl a ball or two to the -village champion batsman, and when the opportunity arises to gratify -his wish you will see him, hardly higher than the stumps, bowling with -an action exactly similar to the crack village bowler, and scorning to -encroach so much as an inch over the line of the bowling stump. And oh! -what sleepless nights ensue from the anticipation of actually seeing -with his own eyes on the following Saturday one of the real cracks -of England--one who has positively played in Gentlemen _v._ Players, -or represented England against Australia! No wonder the boy becomes -imbued with keenness for the game, when everyone in the village, from -the parson to the old lady who keeps the sweetshop, is continually -talking about cricket. As the boy grows older he begins to make his -mark in the village club, and when he is eighteen or nineteen, to the -delight of his father, mother, sisters, and himself, he is selected -to make one of the twenty-two colts of his county that are chosen -to play against the county team. After having played in public, and -perhaps tasted the pleasures of success, the father finds that his son -is restless and disturbed in his trade, and wishes to give it up and -become a professional cricketer. So it happens that his name is sent up -to the county secretary as wanting a situation, and the young fellow -finds himself launched into the world on his own account as a cricket -professional. - -With regard to the young man’s prospect of success on starting in his -new life, we are bound to say that, assuming he has only the average -cricket ability of the ordinary professional, his chances of even -making a livelihood are not particularly bright. He may, and no doubt -will, earn as much as 2_l._ a week, or even more, during the summer -months; but at the end of August or beginning of September he will find -himself with very little money in his pocket, and seven of the coldest -and worst months of the year to face. He _may_ get employment in the -winter months--many professionals do, either as colliers or as porters, -or some other work. We have known them to do clerk’s work for railways -in the winter; but all work for men only willing to stick to it for a -few months is extremely uncertain, and there can be no doubt that many -cricket professionals have a bad time in the winter. - -On the whole, professionals who have an assured place in their county -eleven have, for men of their social position, a very good time. They -only get nominally 5_l._ a match, but this often means a minimum wage -of 10_l._ a week, and besides this they are well known and consequently -well advertised, and this means a good deal. Many have shops for sale -of cricket goods and golf clubs, footballs and archery, _cum multis -aliis_. A great many become publicans, which, though many of us think -a loathsome profession, is at any rate a livelihood, and they become -publicans because they are well known and popular, and brewers like -such men to manage their public-houses. Even if they keep no shop, -they are constantly selling bats and balls, and a fair proportion of -them, the picked men of the profession, get permanent posts in public -schools. When there is no county match on a great many, especially in -the North, get engagements in the detestable modern one-day league -match. Leaving publicans out of the question, at the present day, from -our own knowledge, the following old and young professionals keep -cricket shops: Daft, Shaw and Shrewsbury, Gunn, Watson, Briggs, Sugg, -Nichols, Abel, the two Quaifes, Walter Wright, Baldwin, Peate, Ward, -Tunnicliffe, and George Hearne, and there are no doubt many more; while -the following have permanent engagements as coaches at schools, often -with a shop also: Wright of Nottingham, Louis Hall, Woof, Emmett, F. -Ward, Wootton, and Painter. - -In addition to all this, in some counties there has arisen, in the last -year or so, a system of winter wages, or a bonus paid about Christmas, -and when all things are considered, we cannot help thinking that a -professional of ability who is steady has a better time of it than any -other working man; and even if not a publican or shopkeeper, many have -trades to which they can turn their hands in the winter. - -The first-class professional cricketer is usually a well-made, -strong-looking man, ranging from two or three and twenty to thirty -five, with agreeable, quiet manners. He is a great favourite with the -crowd, and when his side is in may be seen walking round the ground -surrounded by a body of admirers, any one of whom is ready and willing -at any moment to treat his ideal hero to a glass of anything he may -wish for. It is greatly to the player’s credit that in the face of this -temptation to insobriety he is such a sober, temperate man. I have -never seen on a cricket field a first-class professional player the -worse for drink, and I have only on one occasion heard the slightest -whisper against the sobriety of such a man during the progress of a -match. I believe that, as a class, and considering the thirsty nature -of their occupation and the opportunities that offer themselves for -drinking, there is no more sober body of men than cricket professionals. - -Having attempted to give a short, and it is hoped impartial, -description of the cricket professional, let us, before resuming the -subject of bowling, return to the assertion that the more cricket gets -into the hands of professional players the worse it will be for the -game and its reputation. At present cricket is perhaps the most popular -of all our national recreations; it is certainly the most popular -_game_, though football has lately made great strides in popular -opinion, and it is rightly considered to be the manliest and the freest -from all mischievous influences. What these latter are, and what a -pernicious and enervating influence they exercise on other branches -of our national sports, is known to everyone. I allude to the betting -and book-making element, which from the earliest days has been the -curse of sport. What is the worst feature about horse-racing? To what -do English lovers of true sport owe the fact that every racecourse is -the rendezvous of the biggest blackguards and knaves in the kingdom? -Is it not betting, and the pecuniary inducement it offers to every -kind of dirty, shabby practice? The sullying influence has spread -to the running-path, and even, if report says true, to the river -and football field. Happily there is never the slightest whisper of -suspicion against the straightness of our cricket players, and this is -entirely owing to the absence of the betting element in connection with -the game. It is an unfortunate fact that the tendency of first-class -cricket nowadays is to swamp the amateur by the professional. Some of -our best county teams are almost wholly composed of the latter class. -The time taken up in big matches is so great, owing to their being -drawn out by a late start and early finish each day, that the amateur -is beginning to realise his inability to give up from his business or -profession so much of this valuable commodity. What has happened in -consequence? Cricket--i.e. first-class cricket--is becoming a regular -monetary speculation. Thousands upon thousands troop almost daily to -see the big matches, flooding the coffers of the county or club, which -does its very best to spin out the match for the sake of the money. -If this continue, our best matches will become nothing better than -gate-money contests, to the detriment of the true interests of the game -and its lovers. - -Bowling is as much worthy of the name of an art as any other branch -of sport. The skill, science, and practice which are necessary before -a man can throw a good salmon fly, or before he can reckon on bringing -down a good average of high rocketing pheasants, are equally necessary -for one who wishes to become an adept at bowling. Perhaps bowling -does not require the same oneness of hand and eye as batting, but -it demands, if possible, more practice and experience, and to a far -greater extent the exercise of mental qualities. The object of the -bowler is to outmanœuvre the batsman; he has either to hit the stumps -or draw him into some incautiousness or hesitation of play, which will -result in the ball being caught from the bat or in the batsman being -stumped out by the wicket-keeper. This is a wide field, and suggests at -once that to become proficient a bowler must think--and think deeply -too--not once or twice every few minutes, but before each ball, for -none should ever be delivered without a particular object. Every ball -must be part and parcel of a scheme which the bowler has in his mind -for getting rid of the batsman. The object of every bowler, whether -fast or slow, is always to bowl what is called a ‘good length’--i.e. -to pitch the ball so close to the batsman that he cannot play it on -the ‘bounce,’ or, in cricket parlance, ‘on the long-hop,’ and yet so -far from him that he cannot play it just as it touches the ground -or immediately on the rise--i.e. on the ‘half-volley.’ There can be -no precise measurement of the exact spot on which the ‘good-length’ -ball must pitch, as it is constantly varying according to the state -of the ground, the pace of the bowler, and the size and style of the -batsman. When the ground is ‘slow’ and ‘sticky’ from recent rain, the -good-length ball will have to be pitched considerably farther than when -it is ‘hard’ and ‘fast,’ as of course the ball will come faster off -the ground when it is in the latter state than when in the former. The -reason why the bowling of this particular ball is always the object of -every bowler is because it compels the batsman to meet the ball with -the bat by forward play, and because in so doing he often loses sight -of the ball from the moment it touches the ground till it strikes the -bat. No one can be called a good bowler until he has the power at will -of bowling ball after ball of this sort. It often happens when two -batsmen are well set, and every wile and ‘dodge’ of the bowlers has -been tried without avail, that two bowlers will have to go on to bowl, -or try to bowl, nothing else but good-length balls, in the hopes of -keeping down the runs. If this can be done effectually, a batsman is -bound through impatience to make a mistake which in time may cost him -his wicket. - -Every ball that leaves the bowler’s hand has, in addition to the -propelling power imparted by the bowler, one of four different motions. -The ball as it travels is either spinning from right to left; or -from left to right; or with a downward vertical motion; or an upward -vertical motion. It is a fact that it is well-nigh an impossibility for -a ball to leave the hand of the veriest beginner without having one of -these four motions to a certain extent imparted to it. - -On these four rotary motions depends how much and in what direction -the ball will twist or deviate from its course, and also the speed and -height it will assume after touching the ground. One of the arts of a -bowler is to cheat the batsman by making the ball pitch in one spot -and, after the pitch, suddenly take a different direction; another is -to make the ball rise quicker off the ground than a batsman would be -led to expect from the ordinary rules of reflection. These arts are -accomplished by different movements of the fingers and hand at the -moment of delivering the ball; for the reason why every ball has a -certain amount of spin on it is because the fingers, being in contact -with the ball as it leaves the hand, cause it to rotate (though perhaps -so infinitesimally as not to be noticeable) on its journey to the -ground. - -The spin, or rotary motion, from right to left is gained by grasping -the ball chiefly with the thumb and first and second fingers, the -third and fourth fingers being placed together round the other side -of the ball. The moment the ball leaves the hand the latter is turned -quickly over from right to left, and at the same time the first and -second finger and thumb, coming over with the hand, impart a powerful -twist to the ball, which leaves the hand when the latter is turned -palm downwards. There is also at the time of delivery an outward and -upward movement of the elbow which gives the arm the shape of a curve, -or almost a semicircle. The ball goes on its way spinning rapidly from -right to left, and the moment it touches the ground twists very sharply -towards the off side of the batsman. This ball, termed in cricket -parlance the ‘leg-break,’ when well bowled is perhaps one of the most -deadly of all balls, but it is also the most difficult for a bowler to -master. It is always a slow ball, as to bowl it fast with any accuracy -of pitch is an impossibility--at any rate, it may be assumed to be -so, as no bowler has ever yet appeared who could bowl it otherwise -than slow. Palmer, the Australian bowler, was about the fastest ever -known at this ball, but his faster ones were very inaccurate in pitch, -and he could only bowl them, strange to say, very occasionally. The -author, although he has played innings after innings against this -bowler, never remembers receiving a single fast leg-break from him. -The fact of the hand having to turn over from right to left, and of -the ball being delivered underneath the hand, so to speak, causes it -to be extremely difficult to attain accuracy of pitch and direction. -There are many men who can bowl this ball in practice at the nets, but -who never dare attempt it in a match, having no confidence whatever -in their ability to bowl it straight, or even fairly straight. It is -no uncommon occurrence to see this ball, bowled by one who has tried -it in practice, travelling somewhere near to where point is standing. -There are some slow bowlers who have become fairly proficient at it, -and who have enjoyed at various times, and especially against batsmen -they have never met before, a certain amount of success; but it is -a style of bowling which should only be encouraged to the extent of -enabling every bowler to use it occasionally. If nothing but this ball -is bowled over after over, by constant repetition it loses its sting. -The batsman gets wary, and when the ball is pitched on his leg side -gets before his stumps to protect them, and hangs his bat in front of -him, thereby rendering the loss of his wicket extremely improbable; -and when it is pitched straight for the middle stump or on the off -side, knowing the danger of a hit at the pitch of this ball, he will -simply satisfy himself with protecting his stumps with his legs, and -with letting the ball pass the off stump without further protest. The -trap laid for the batsman in this style of bowling is the danger he -incurs by hitting unless he is actually on the pitch of the ball; if -he falls into the snare, the ball is perfectly certain to go up in the -air, and generally in the direction of cover-point or mid-off. This, of -course, is owing to the twist of the ball causing it to hit the side -and not the centre of the bat. Should the batsman in the act of hitting -miss the ball altogether, as is not infrequently the case, he pays the -penalty of being stumped unless he happens to be a fast-footed hitter. -Now, of course, these two traps are well known to every good batsman, -and consequently it is, as a rule, useless to bowl ball after ball of -this nature to him--one might just as well whistle for grouse at the -end of November to come and be shot. - -This ball, therefore, should only be bowled at intervals, and when -according to the bowler’s judgment it may have a fair prospect of -success. Usually this happens on two occasions. The first is when -a batsman has just begun his innings, and is playing nervously and -without confidence; a twisting ball then from the leg side is extremely -apt to fluster and annoy him, and a catch in the slips or at point, or -a catch and bowl, is not infrequently the result. The second is when a -hitter is in, and is hitting to all parts of the field. Then the ball -may be bowled with a great chance of success, especially if the man -is anxious and impatient to hit every ball. He is extremely likely to -hit a little short of the pitch, with the above-mentioned result. It -is not a good thing for the bowler to worry the batsman with this ball -if the latter seems not to like it or to play it nervously; it should -at most be used not more than twice in an over. Let the bowler always -remember that too much of one particular ball, even if distasteful to -the batsman, will frighten and steady him, and perhaps in the end teach -him to play it correctly. There are some batsmen, and good batsmen -too, who never seem to be at home to this ball, although they may -have played it scores of times, and I remember once seeing an amusing -incident at a match in which a bowler who had adopted it was playing -sad havoc with the other side. The first three batsmen had all rushed -out to try and hit the leg-break ball, and, failing to do so, paid the -inevitable penalty of being stumped. Their captain was furious at their -rashness, especially as they were all three good players; he explained, -and rightly, that the proper way to play the ball was either by hitting -it on the full volley--i.e. before it touched the ground--or else -remaining inside the crease and playing it quietly. He went in himself, -intending to illustrate this principle, and, lo and behold! was stumped -the very first ball he received. He scraped forward a long way to meet -the ball, missed it, and remained in a most elegant Fuller Pilch-like -attitude, fondly imagining the toe of his boot was inside the crease. -It was, as a matter of fact, a good inch outside it. In that match -there were five stumped each innings off the same bowler, and the -captain was one of them both times. On another occasion a batsman with -rather thin and weedy looking legs kept jumping in front of his stumps -every time this ball was delivered. Finally the ball, discovering the -weak spot in this gentleman’s physical proportions, managed to find -(just above the knees) an opening large enough for it to pass through -and dislodge the bails. Great was his astonishment and disgust, and as -he retired crestfallen to the pavilion he said to the writer, who was -one of the fielding side on that occasion, ‘It was not the ball or the -bowler that did that; it was all owing to my confoundedly skinny legs!’ -A dodge well worth trying with this ball is to bowl a good length about -two feet to the leg of the batsman; he is nearly sure to have a hit, -and there is a great chance of the spin on the ball causing it to be a -miss-hit, which may go straight up in the air, for the wicket-keeper, -point, or bowler to secure; even if it is a clean hit to leg it is -nearly bound to be in the air, and long-leg may possibly have a chance. -If this scheme is to be practised it will be generally a good thing for -the bowler to have his long-leg perfectly square, and bring his long -field on round till he is almost in the position of a forward long-leg. -This should be done by quietly waving the hand in such a manner as -to attract the attention of the batsman as little as possible. It is -impossible to lay down any rule for the way in which the fieldsmen -should be placed for this style of bowling, as this depends so much -upon the play of each particular batsman. A long-leg is, however, -nearly always necessary, and very often an extra man out on the leg -side, as mentioned already. Two men out in the field for the average -batsman cannot be dispensed with. The bowler himself, as a rule, will -know how to place his field for each batsman, but on no occasion should -he ever omit to have a short-slip. This is such a very likely place -to get a batsman snapped up that it should never be dispensed with to -any style of bowling, except perhaps to slow under-arm, and not always -then. A slow bowler who intends to use the leg-break, let us say, once -an over, or even once in two overs, and who relies on this ball as most -likely to secure wickets, may on ordinary occasions place his men thus, -but, as we said before, they must be changed to suit the circumstances. - -If the ground is hard and fast, as a rule a third man cannot be -dispensed with; but if inclined to be slow, he may be brought forward -to extra cover-point, between cover-point and mid-off, or else put -deep in the field on the on side. The bowler may, however, see that -the batsman is wide enough awake to restrain himself from hitting -blindly at the pitch of this ball when straight or on the off stump; -it will then be advisable to try him entirely on the leg side--a man -may refuse the bait on one side but take it on the other. In these -circumstances extra cover-point, and sometimes even cover-point as -well, may be brought across the wicket and placed for half-hits wide -on the on--i.e. about half the distance from the batsman that a deep -field would stand. If the batsman assumes a poky style of play, it is -often advantageous, both for saving runs and getting wickets, to have -a short-leg a little nearer the stumps than the umpire, and the mid-on -as near to the batsman as he can venture consistently with safety. In -this, as in every other style of bowling, it is a sovereign rule to -make the batsman play to the ball--i.e. to keep it well pitched up, and -compel him either to hit or play forward. - -A very novel style of this kind of bowling was seen on English cricket -grounds in the summer of 1884, when the Australian team of that year -included W. H. Cooper, so well known to all our cricketers who have -visited the colonies. He bowled round the wicket, and nearly every ball -almost a wide to leg. There was more spin and twist on the ball than -had ever been seen in this country before (excepting, perhaps, in the -bowling of Mr. Stratford, who played for a year or two for Middlesex, -but who never made his mark in first-class cricket). The ball seemed -to be twisted or screwed out of the side of his hand in the way a -billiard-marker will screw a billiard-ball along the table to a certain -spot, and then bring it back to him. But, unfortunately for him, he was -unable to combine any pace with this tremendous twist. The ball was -extraordinarily slow in the air, but directly it pitched it would spin -off the ground comparatively quickly, twisting into the batsman on the -faster wickets, sometimes as much as a yard or more. All his men except -two were on the on side, and he expected his wickets to be obtained -by the impatience of the batsman causing him to rush out, miss, and -get stumped, or else by wide hitting at the pitch of the ball on the -leg side, where there were seven fielders with seven pretty sure pairs -of hands waiting for it. In Australia he had met with a fair share -of success, especially against some of the English elevens which had -been over there. It was this latter consideration which induced the -Australian authorities to believe that he would be a useful addition to -their team. His bowling was most unsuccessful in this country. Whether -this was due to an accident to his hand on the voyage to England, or -from the light here being not so glaring and bright for our English -eyes as it is in Australia, cannot be said for certain, but I have a -strong opinion from my own experience that the reason of his success in -Melbourne against Englishmen was owing to the dreadful glare on that -ground. - -One peculiarity of the leg-twisting ball is that when the ground is -soft and sticky it is comparatively of no avail. The ball then, of -course, twists to a greater extent than when the ground is hard, but it -leaves the pitch so very slowly that the batsman can either wait for -it on the long-hop or hit it on the full or half-volley. The leg-break -ball on a soft ground, if bowled at all, must be bowled faster than on -hard, in order to counteract the deadness of the turf. The best states -of the ground for this bowling, as indeed for most, are when the ground -has been hard and fast, and has since become crumbly and covered with -loose bits of grass and worn turf, and when there has been heavy rain -to saturate the ground which is being rapidly dried and caked by a -hot sun. In the former state the ball takes plenty of twist, and also -leaves the ground very quickly, in addition to sometimes getting up -uncomfortably high for the batsman. In the caked state the ball takes -lots of twist, and puzzles the batsman by the varied and uneven paces -at which it leaves the ground, sometimes coming sharply and high, at -other stopping on the ground and, in batsman’s parlance, ‘getting up -and looking at you.’ - - SHORT SLIP - - ● - WICKET KEEPER - ╔╦╗ - ● ║║║ - POINT ¯¯¯¯¯ LONG LEG - - - - - ● - COVER POINT - ● - MID ON - - ● - EXTRA MID OFF - ╔╦╗ - ║║║ - ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ - ● ● - MID OFF BOWLER - - - - - - - - ● - DEEP MID OFF - ● - DEEP MID ON - - The leg-break diagram. - - These positions of the fieldsmen will suit under-arm bowling, except - that, perhaps extra mid-off may be put out on the on side. - -The ‘leg-break’ ball is usually bowled from round the wicket, as -from this side there is more scope for the bowler to make the ball -twist. It is doubtless the best side of the stumps to choose for the -delivery of this ball, but every bowler should remember that it is very -nearly as good as a change of bowling to change from ‘round’ to ‘over’ -the wicket, and this is especially so with leg-break balls. The ball -delivered from round the wicket generally leaves the hand a good foot -outside the extremity of the bowling crease; this means that it starts -about 4 feet 4 inches from the middle stump of the bowler’s wicket, and -in its journey through the air, even if pitched in a line with the leg -stump of the batsman’s wicket, it has to make considerable way from -the leg side of the wicket. This, of course, makes the ball go across -the wicket more from the pitch, and, as a rule, means that a leg-stump -leg-break ball round the wicket misses the wicket on the off side. A -batsman, if the ball is pitched off his wicket, may defend it, as the -rule of leg before wicket now stands, with his legs, and consequently -the bowler has not much chance of hitting it. When bowled from over -the wicket the leg-break ball, being delivered in a direct line with -the batsman’s wicket, will naturally, if pitched on the leg-stump or -between the legs and the wicket, not twist so much, thus making it more -likely to hit the wicket if missed by the batsman. There is also a -direct advantage to be gained by bowling over the wicket if the batsman -is inclined to get in front of his stumps, as there is always a better -chance for the bowler to get an appeal for leg before wicket answered -in his favour than when bowling from the other side. - - ● - SHORT SLIP - ● - WICKET KEEPER - ╔╦╗ - ║║║ - ● ¯¯¯¯¯ - POINT ● - LONG LEG - - - - ● ● - MID ON HALF HIT - - - - HALF HIT - ╔╦╗ ● - ║║║ ↑ - ¯¯¯¯¯ ● | - ● BOWLER OR| - MID OFF _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _| - ● - - - - - - - ● - DEEP MID OFF - ● - DEEP MID ON - - Position of field if bowling on leg side. - -Although, as previously mentioned, there has never been any instance -of the leg-break ball being bowled by a fast bowler, some of the best -bowlers of the past generation of cricketers used to bowl with a -considerable bias from the leg side, and were also of well over medium -pace. Martingell and Silcock were bowlers of this class. This old -style was very effective, and it is greatly to be regretted that it -has almost entirely disappeared from the game at the present day. It -differed from the slow ball that has been discussed only in the amount -of spin; and as there was so much less power expended in spinning or -twisting, the pace of the ball was greatly in excess of that which -can be got on to the slow leg-break. The ball was delivered round the -wicket, at the very extent of the crease, in order to make the angle -from the hand to an imaginary straight line between the two middle -stumps as great as possible. The hand was very little higher than the -hip when the ball was delivered, and instead of the hand and wrist -being completely turned over at the moment of delivery, as in the slow -leg-break, the fingers imparted a right to left spin to the ball. -The ball, coming from a great distance round the wicket and with a -considerable amount of leg spin, would be gradually working away to the -batsman’s off side every inch of its journey, both before and after -pitching. Catches in the slips and on the off side were numerous from -this style of bowling, and it required the batsman’s greatest care and -caution to guard himself against playing inside the balls. It is a -great pity we do not see more of this bowling now. - -The next spin or twist on the ball which we will discuss is the rotary -motion from left to right. This, in cricket phraseology, is termed the -‘off’ break, and is far more universal than that from the ‘leg.’ In -fact, so common is it, and so easy to learn, that nearly everyone who -has ever bowled in a match knows more or less how to put this spin on -the ball. It is, of course, always easier to get spin on to a slow ball -than on to a fast one. - -[Illustration: The leg-break.] - -When the ball to be delivered is a slow one, the fingers and hand -may be twisted into almost any shape, as so little power is required -actually to deliver the ball; all the strength of hand, of wrist, and -of the fingers may be utilised for the purposes of spin alone. When the -ball has to be a fast one, the power necessary to propel the ball at -the required pace prevents so much of the power of fingers, &c., being -expended on spin. A slow ball always takes the spin, after leaving -the ground, to a greater extent than a fast one, because it is longer -on the ground when it pitches, and the spinning has more time to take -effect on the turf. - -[Illustration: Likely balls; and what may become of them if not -correctly played. - - _a_, a likely one for a wild hitter to get himself out on the off - side; _b_ and _c_, likely for a stump, or, if hit with straight bat, - a catch to deep field-off; _d_ and _e_, likely for ‘catch and bowl;’ - _f_, long-leg and half-hit chances--short-slip and wicket-keeper - often get an easy chance off this ball.] - -The natural spin on every ball which is bowled is from left to -right--i.e. the off break. Even when a fielder throws in a ball from -a distance it almost invariably has this spin on it. If you watch the -smallest boy in the street throwing a stone, you will find, nine times -out of ten, the stone has acquired this spin. It is then no wonder -that almost every right-handed bowler relies upon this twist as his -principal artifice. The twist depends rather more on the power of the -fingers than on the hand and wrist, as in the ‘leg-break.’ The ball is -usually, by a slow bowler, grasped firmly with all the fingers resting -on the seam, as this gives more purchase and resistance for the fingers -to operate. The latter at the moment of delivery spin the ball, almost -in the same way as they would spin a top, and instead of an upward and -outward motion of the elbow, as in the ‘leg-break,’ there is an inward -motion towards the side of the bowler. The hand is turned over outwards -when the ball is delivered, and, if properly bowled and pitched just -outside the off stump, and under good conditions of ground, the ball, -after the pitch, will change its course abruptly towards the batsman -and the wicket. - -Differing from the ‘leg-break,’ this ball can with practice be -accompanied by a great accuracy of pitch--an accuracy which has been -attained almost to perfection by some of our best known bowlers. The -late James Southerton, the famous Surrey bowler, could bowl in this -style for hours with only a very occasional variation from a perfect -‘good length.’ Alfred Shaw, of Nottingham, in his day was perhaps the -greatest exponent of accuracy of pitch combined with the slow ‘off -break,’ or what is generally termed ‘break-back.’ This ball should be -bowled a good length, and generally about two or three inches outside -the off stump. - -Of course the amount of twist the ball will take depends on the state -of the ground, and this should at once be apparent to the bowler. The -danger most to be apprehended by the batsman from the off break is that -in playing forward, if not quite on the pitch of the ball, he is very -apt, owing to the twist, to play outside, and allow it to pass between -his bat and right leg to the wicket. It is never a wise thing for the -bowler to use the ‘off break’ every ball, although there are many who -do so. Even if he is devoid of all other artifice, and has no command -over the arts of ‘change of pace,’ ‘flight,’ or the ‘leg-break,’ he -should often vary his style by a ball without any twist at all, and -this should not always be straight. If a batsman has been playing over -after over nothing but good-length ‘off break,’ a ball pitched about -the same spot, two or three inches outside the off stump, and without -any off break at all, will very often be found to go to hand in the -slips, because the batsman is expecting the break and plays inside the -ball. - -[Illustration: The off break.] - -The fast ‘off break’ is a most deadly ball, and Lockwood, Richardson, -Mold, and Hearne are four bowlers who have a consistent break. A slight -slope in the ground from the off side is always a great advantage to -fast bowlers who try the ‘break-back.’ This comparatively rare ball, -when it does come, is sure to try the very best batsman. Its difficulty -arises from the fact that the ball is of such a pace as to necessitate -quick forward play, when the sudden turn after the pitch causes it to -be missed. For playing ‘off breaks’ of all paces, it is a great and -golden rule for batsmen to remember: _Never allow space between the -bat and the left leg for the ball to pass through_. This rule, which -insures the left leg of the batsman being placed well across the wicket -when playing forward, if followed, will render it almost impossible for -him to be bowled out with an ‘off break.’ It is an astounding fact that -this simple rule, which should be patent to everyone, seems unknown to -all our best batsmen with one or two notable exceptions. W. G. Grace -has always played with his leg up to his bat, thereby preventing the -ball from finding an opening between the two. W. W. Read, of Surrey, -is another who plays thus. We do not express any opinion here as to -the bearing of this rule on the leg-before-wicket question. It is -sufficient for a batsman at present, as the rule now stands, that so -long as the ball does not pitch between the two wickets he cannot be -given out ‘l.b.w.’ - -[Illustration: ‘Off breaks.’ - - A, B, C, all good ones; D, if the batsman stands with his legs some - way from the leg stump, this is likely to bowl him off his legs; but - it is a beauty to hit on the on side.] - -The two ‘spins,’ from the leg and the off, are the chief and most -important for all practical purposes. If a bowler by constant practice -has acquired the power of twisting the ball from off or leg at will, -and can at the same time bowl a ‘good length,’ he has laid a tolerable -foundation for future success. We say tolerable, because, in bowling, -twist, as we shall see later on, is not everything; it is an essential -element in good bowling, but it is only one of several, all of which -must combine together before anyone can earn the reputation of a -first-class bowler. - -The two other spins which can be put on the ball are what have been -called the ‘upward vertical’ and the ‘downward vertical.’ By the -‘upward vertical,’ I mean when the ball spins in its way to the ground -vertically, and upwards with regard to the bowler. It may be compared -to the spin imparted to the billiard ball in the screw stroke. This -is effected by striking the ball low down, which makes it revolve in -its course upwards. The effect this upward revolution has is seen when -the striker’s ball meets the object ball, the former having a decided -inclination to stop and return to the striker. In the same way a -cricket ball, when made to revolve upwards, has a tendency to stop and -go slower off the pitch than it went before it reached the ground. - -This twist, as a matter of fact, is never practised; and it is a great -pity that more attention has not been paid to it. Of course it is very -much more difficult to make the ball revolve in this manner than in -either the leg or the off break, but it is quite within the powers of -the possessor of a fairly strong set of fingers. The lower half only -of the ball should be held, so that the upper half protrudes above the -hand and fingers, and at the moment of delivery, which must be from the -level of the shoulder or lower, the fingers and hand must impart as -much upward spin as possible. - -The downward vertical spin is the reverse of this, and is caused by -the upper half of the ball being grasped instead of the lower, as in -the upward. This spin imparts to the ball a tendency to come quicker -from the pitch than the pace in the air would seem to suggest, and is -analogous to the ‘following up’ stroke at billiards. The latter is -made by striking the ball at the top, making it revolve downwards and -vertically from the striker. Very many bowlers possess this downward -spin in their bowling without being at all aware of the fact. They -know, as also do those who play against them, that every now and then -one of their balls will, in cricket slang, ‘make haste from the pitch.’ -The batsman finds he has mistaken the pace of the ball, which flies -past him before he is anything like ready to play it, and when his -stumps lie prostrate, as often as not he will come back to the pavilion -with the old, old story, ‘Bowled with a shooter;’ whereas, in fact, -the ball has hit the middle or even upper part of his stumps. He has -entirely lost the ball from the pitch owing to his misjudgment of its -pace, and concludes erroneously that it has shot underneath his bat. - -We have now considered the four kinds of spin which can be put on to -a cricket ball. Of course there may be combinations of two kinds, as, -for instance, the ball may be spinning from right to left or left to -right, and at the same time be revolving to a certain extent vertically -downwards or upwards; but it would be impossible to discuss the result -of every such combination. - -The ball may break from ‘leg,’ and at the same time show by its -acceleration in speed after the pitch that it has been revolving -downwards as well, and the same may happen with the break from the -‘off;’ but such variations are beyond the reach of any practical -discussion. - -Let us now turn to another element of good bowling--change of pace. -It does not require any great amount of technical cricket knowledge to -understand that, if a bowler delivers every ball at the same uniform -pace, his bowling is easier for a batsman to judge and play than -when he is continually altering and changing the pace. If a batsman -misjudges the pace of the ball he often loses his wicket. If he plays -too slow for a fast ball, or too fast for a slow one, he generally -makes a fatal mistake. As it is necessary for a shooter to accurately -judge the pace of a driven grouse before pulling the trigger, so is it -equally necessary for a batsman to judge the pace of the ball before -he plays to it. This power of judging pace only comes after long -experience; but when it does exist it seems to be exercised almost -intuitively, and without any conscious thought--indeed there is often -no time for thought. - -Perhaps the one thing which made Mr. Spofforth, the famous Australian -bowler, superior at his best to all others, and has earned him the -reputation of being the best bowler that has ever lived, was his -wonderful power of changing the pace of the ball without making it -perceptible to the batsman. In his bowling the same run, action, and -exertion were apparently used for delivering a slow or medium-paced -ball as for a fast one. Many a time, especially on his first arrival in -England, when this bowling was strange to our batsmen, the ball seemed -to dislodge the bails long after the bat had completed the stroke, and -was perhaps high in the air. Change of pace, to be effective, must -not mean change of action; and the first thing a bowler who wishes to -practise this art must understand, is that the slightest variation -in style or action for a slower or faster ball will at once put the -batsman on the _qui vive_ and destroy the effect of the device. - -C. T. B. Turner, the Australian bowler, was a great adept at changing -the pace of the ball without sounding any warning note to the batsman. -He is one of the very finest bowlers we have ever seen bowl; he has -great command over the ball, and a beautiful and easy delivery. His -performances in this country have been wonderful; the only defect -in his bowling which, in the writer’s opinion, keeps him from being -considered Spofforth’s equal is that his action is too easy to see. A -good batsman is not so likely to be deceived by him as readily as by -Spofforth’s windmill deliveries. - -When a slow or medium-pace bowler wishes to deceive the batsman by -a change of pace, he has, of course, two courses open to him--either -to accelerate the speed of the ball or diminish it. When he wishes -to bowl a faster ball than usual, he must remember that the object -of the experiment is to make the batsman play slower to the ball -than he has been doing, and that this result will be far more easily -accomplished by pitching a good-length--if anything, a little further -than a good-length--ball, than by a short one. If the latter is bowled, -the batsman, although deceived in the pace up to the pitch, has time -to discover his mistake before the ball reaches him, and consequently -has his bat ready in time to stop it. If a ball is, however, pitched a -good length, or a trifle beyond it, and up to the pitch is successful -in deceiving the batsman, he will not have much chance of stopping it -afterwards. - -Palmer, another of the famous Australians, sends down the best fast -ball that has been seen from a medium-pace bowler. There is no change -of action to warn the batsman, no longer or faster run, but the ball -comes with lightning rapidity, generally pitched well up, and very -often in the block-hole, making that most deadly ball a ‘fast yorker,’ -about which something will be said farther on. The change from slow or -medium-pace bowling to quite slow is much more frequently practised -than the change to fast, and consequently we may presume it is more -easy of accomplishment. There are few slow or medium-pace bowlers who -do not try occasionally to deceive the batsman by making the high slow -ball pitch a little shorter than the rest have been doing. But although -there are many bowlers who endeavour thus to deceive, there are but few -who are really skilful in the art. - -It is an extremely difficult thing to reduce the pace on the ball -without altering the action. Mr. Spofforth, the Australian, as we have -observed, excelled in this, as also did Alfred Shaw, of Nottingham, -when at his best. For many years Shaw had the reputation of being the -best slow bowler in England, and justly so. His most deadly device was, -after he had bowled three or four of his ordinary paced ones, to toss -the ball a little higher, a little slower, and a little shorter. Unless -the batsman detected the alteration in speed at the moment of delivery, -he made what was often a fatal mistake. If he hit, the ball would go -high in the air, generally in the direction of deep field-on; if he -played forward, a catch and bowl was the very likely result. If this -ball is bowled without deceiving the batsman, it generally meets with -a very heavy penalty, as, if rightly judged at first, it can generally -be either waited for and hit almost to any part of the field on the -‘long-hop’ or bound, or run down and driven past the bowler; but the -latter feat can only be accomplished by batsmen who are very quick on -their legs. - -Some of the best exponents of this ball appear, just prior to -delivery, to greatly exert their bodies, and go through their whole -customary action, while the arm, dragged slower than usual through -the air, delivers the ball when the body is comparatively at rest. -This, no doubt, gives the batsman the idea that the ball is going to -be delivered before it really does leave the bowler’s hand. But it -would be quite beyond the capabilities of the writer to furnish any -intelligible hints as to how to bowl this ball; every bowler will with -practice find this out for himself. - -As a rule, good bowlers of the present day bowl with their arms above -the shoulder, and it is a rudiment in the art that the action of -delivery should be as high as possible. The high delivery is certainly -the most successful where the ground is hard, fast, and true, as then -little or no twist can be put on to the ball, and the higher it is -made to bound the more chance there is of the batsman making an uppish -stroke. In addition to this advantage which the high has over the low -delivery, the higher the arm is raised above the shoulder the more -difficult it is for a batsman to judge the pitch and flight of the ball. - -With regard to the amount of success that slow and fast bowling meet -with, a great deal depends on the state of the ground, but speaking of -England, and on hard wickets, fast bowlers are having the best of it; -at any rate, Richardson is far the most deadly, while Mold, Hearne, -Davidson, Bland, Cuttell, and Hirst are very successful. In a later -chapter, however, the causes are discussed which seem to show that head -bowlers, bowlers who change their pace and methods, will have to be the -bowlers of the future. But it is also true, as a general rule, that -slow bowling is more difficult to play than fast. The advantages that -it possesses over fast are as follows:-- - -First.--The slowly delivered ball describes a curved line in the air -both before it pitches and afterwards to the bat; and balls coming in a -curved line are far more difficult to play accurately than those which -come quick and straight from the pitch. If the batsman properly judged -the fast ball, by simply putting his bat straight forward he would -always meet and stop it. It is not quite so with the slower ball. The -ball, coming on to the ground in a curve, will leave it in a curve, and -may consequently go over the shoulder of the bat. Besides, the quicker -the ball is, the shorter time the batsman has to play it; his mode of -playing must be decided on instantaneously, so he has no time to get -into two minds on the subject. - -[Illustration: _SLOW BALL_] - -[Illustration: _FAST BALL_] - -Secondly.--In slow bowling there is always more actual hitting than -in fast, and the more hitting the greater chance there is of the ball -going up in the air. Fast bowling may perhaps be driven more--that -is to say, it may be pushed hard by good forward play in front of -the wicket in all directions; but it is not often with this style of -bowling that the bat is lifted high in the air, and the shoulders, -arms, and whole body combine together for a big hit or ‘slog,’ as it -is sometimes called, whereas slows often tempt the best of batsmen to -hit without quite getting on to the pitch of the ball, the consequence -being that the ball goes up in the air somewhere. - -It is a very common occurrence to see a slow bowler who is bowling -really well, and with tolerable success, taken off at once on the -advent of some batsman who has earned a reputation for big hitting. -He himself may be nervous about the fearful smashing the batsman may -give him, and suggest to his captain to put on some fast bowler in -his place, or else the captain may make the change himself. What is -the usual result? The fast bowler compels the hitter to play a steady -game, and then, when the latter has just got his eye well set and fit -for hitting, on go the slows again, with the probable result of being -utterly knocked to pieces in a few overs. If the slows had been allowed -a chance at first, when the batsman’s eye had not got settled down to -the light, and he himself was still suffering from the nervousness -inevitable to every man on first going in, what a different tale might -have been told! It is always the best thing to put on slows to a big -hitter when he first comes in. His anxiety to begin to hit at once is -fostered by the slow, easy-looking balls that give him such time to -lift his bat and put his whole strength into the stroke; this anxiety -is often helped, too, by his nervousness, which in many instances -produces a tendency to hit. - -On a certain occasion one of the biggest hitters our cricket grounds -have ever seen made about eighty runs without having a single slow ball -bowled to him. The captain at last put on a slow bowler out of sheer -desperation. As the slow bowler walked up to the wicket to bowl, the -big hitter turned to him and said, ‘What, are _you_ going to bowl your -donkey-drops? I’ll hit them all out of the ground.’ ‘If you _keep on_ -doing it I shall have to go off,’ was the modest reply. The third ball -of the over there was a terrific slog; the bat fairly whistled with the -speed it went through the air, and the ball, touching the shoulder, -landed in short-slip’s hands. - -There are only two exceptions to the golden rule to put on slows when -a hitter first comes in: the first is when there is something peculiar -connected with the condition of the ground which is making a fast -bowler at that particular time especially deadly; and the second, when -the condition of the game renders it imperatively necessary to keep -down the runs at all costs. In the latter case a slow bowler may prove -too expensive, as even the miss-hits of a strong hitter are apt to go -to the boundary. - -Thirdly (to resume the consideration of the advantages of slow bowling, -interrupted by the anecdote and the statement of the rule and its -exceptions).--Slow bowling offers more opportunity to the wicket-keeper -for stumping than fast. It is so tempting for a batsman to rush in and -drive the slow tossed-up ball that often he chooses the wrong one, -misses it, and is left standing still a yard or two out of his ground. -Chances to the wicket-keeper are also much easier off slows than fast, -and consequently a great many more wickets are taken. - -Fourthly.--The very slowness of the ball induces liberties of all sorts -to be taken, besides that of hitting mentioned above. The batsman, -when his eye is well in, often tries to score by placing balls to -a particular spot, which their pitch does not justify. A favourite -error that even the best batsmen fall into is that of trying to hit -the leg-stump half-volleys too much to the on side, and sometimes -absolutely to leg, a stroke which would never enter his head were a -fast bowler bowling. - -Fifthly.--A slow bowler has much greater command of pitch, pace, and -spin than a fast one. The power which is expended by the latter on -the pace of the ball is available by the former for these more subtle -devices. There is consequently a much wider field for experiment open -to the slow bowler. Usually a fast bowler bowls away ball after ball -in the hopes of breaking down the batsman’s defence by a good-length -ball or a ‘yorker;’ if he fails to do this he retires in favour of the -next change. A slow bowler has many devices, of which actually bowling -the batsman out is perhaps very seldom resorted to. He should be able -to pitch the ball within a few inches of the spot he wishes, and thus, -when he has ascertained any particular weakness the batsman seems to -possess, he is able to take advantage of it. There are very few batsmen -who have not certain favourite strokes; some may have a partiality for -cutting, others for playing on the on side for ones and twos, others -for off driving; but whatever the particular _penchant_ may be, a slow -bowler’s business is to make himself acquainted with it and then take -the greatest possible advantage of it. Suppose a batsman shows by his -play that he is always on the look-out for a cut, and even goes so far -as to cut balls which should be driven or played forward to, on the -off side, a slow bowler by his command of pitch and pace may do much -execution. A ball pitched a trifle further up than usual on the off -side and a trifle faster may, and often does, induce the batsman to -try his favourite stroke, at the imminent peril of placing the ball in -the hands of point or third man, or of being caught at the wicket. A -slower and higher ball than usual pitched on the leg-stump will often -induce a batsman to try a favourite ‘on side’ stroke, at the risk of -playing with a cross bat and being bowled or out leg before wicket. In -fact, every fault that it is possible for a batsman to possess may be -taken advantage of by a slow bowler to a much greater extent than by -one of great pace. How often one sees a batsman who has given great -trouble dismissed by a slow bowler who seems to have absolutely no -merit whatever! The ball is tossed high in the air with apparently no -spin of any sort, and so slow as hardly to reach the wicket, and yet -the well-set batsman falls a prey to his over-anxiety to play the ball -where the pitch of it does not warrant. - -Sixthly.--A slow bowler has the advantage over a fast one of having -what is equivalent to an extra man in the field, viz. himself. After -the ball is bowled he is firm on his legs, ready to run in for a catch -and bowl, or to dart to the on or the off side as the batsman shapes to -play the ball. No matter how hard the ball is returned from the bat, he -has always ample time to get down with the right hand or the left or to -jump high in the air; when the batsmen are running he is always able to -get behind his wickets ready to receive the ball when returned by the -fielder, a golden rule for every bowler which is too often neglected. -A fast bowler is generally unsteady on his legs after the ball is -delivered; the pace with which he runs up to the wicket carries him -on a few paces after the delivery, and he is thus generally unable to -exhibit the same activity and sharpness in fielding his own bowling as -a slow bowler does. In days gone by, when grounds were bad and rough, -slow bowling was not so successful as fast, but the general improvement -in the ground has altered this. - -[Illustration: A hot return.] - -And now, having seen some of the advantages slow bowling possesses -over fast, and before discussing the latter’s merits, let us see on -what principles a slow bowler should endeavour to bowl, and what -rules he should follow in order to attain success. Whilst speaking of -slow bowling we shall refer to any pace under that of medium, as the -rules and principles of medium are included in what is said on fast -bowling. Perhaps the most important thing that every bowler, whether -fast, medium, or slow, should realise is, as we have said before, -to keep the ball well pitched up when a batsman first comes in. The -importance of this rule is manifest, as a short-pitched ball requires -no play, whereas one pitched a good length, or even farther, requires -steadiness and accuracy of eye to play; because there is a moment after -its pitch when it is lost to the vision, and consequently if the eye -lacks accuracy the ball will be missed or bungled. An old professional -cricketer, one who has made his mark in times gone by both with bat -and ball, once observed to the author, ‘Anything rather than straight -long-hops, sir, when a man first comes in; wides and full-pitches are -better,’ and he was right; straight long-hops, which, alas! many of -our professional bowlers bowl only too often, in order to prevent runs -being made off them, do more to get in the eyes of batsmen than any -other sort of ball. Often and often one sees a bowler, and perhaps -one who has the name of being first-class, send down to a new batsman -straight long-hops one after the other--balls which it is impossible, -or nearly so, to score off, and then at the end of each over walk to -his place with a thoroughly satisfied air, as if adding one more maiden -over to his analysis had really helped his side on to the ultimate goal -of victory. It is always better for a bowler to see a fresh batsman -make half a dozen runs from well-pitched balls or half-volleys his -first over than to see him stop four straight long-hops. - -On the fall of a wicket the bowler should always remember that the -new batsman is entirely unaccustomed to the light and not yet warm -to his work, and that consequently the pet devices which may have -been clearly seen through and mercilessly punished by the retiring -batsman are for the present quite fresh for the new one. He should -consequently begin by doing all he can to get rid of him at once -before he gets ‘set.’ He should in the first two or three overs try -every effective ball he knows--and certainly in the first over he -should try a ‘yorker.’ This ball, called in days gone by a ‘tice,’ an -abbreviation of ‘entice,’ is certainly one of the most deadly balls -that can be bowled, if not absolutely the most deadly. We believe -that, if statistics could be kept of how every wicket fell during the -course of a season, more would be found victims to the ‘yorker’ than -to any other ball. We can find no derivation for the word ‘yorker,’ -but are told that it came from the Yorkshiremen, who were fonder of -bowling this ball than any other. A story is told of a famous old -Yorkshire professional who, on being asked whether he knew why this -ball was called a ‘yorker,’ replied, ‘Of course I do.’ ‘Well?’ said -his questioner. ‘Why, what else could you call it?’ was the answer, -with a puzzled look and a scratch on the top of his head. The ordinary -definition of a ‘yorker’ is a ball that pitches inside the crease, -and this, no doubt, is correct so far as it goes, but it does not -go far enough. It really should be, any ball that pitches directly -underneath the bat. It is quite possible for a man to be bowled out -with a ‘yorker’ when he is two or three yards out of his ground, if he -misjudges the ball, and allows it to pitch directly beneath his bat, -although the ball pitches as far from the crease as he is standing. The -most deadly sort of ‘yorker,’ however, is the one that pitches about -three or four inches inside the crease. One mistake which the batsman -makes with this ball is that he imagines it is going to pitch shorter -for a half-volley, and gets ready to hit, when he finds the ball coming -farther than he expected, and is then too late to stop it. Another -grave error which many batsmen fall into is that of lifting their bats -up, after judging the pace and pitch of the ‘yorker,’ intending to come -down on it as it touches the ground, which really is at the very last -moment. It seems an easy thing to stop a ‘yorker’ in this way, but it -really requires the greatest nicety in timing, and a moment late means -that the ball has passed and the stumps are down. Whenever a batsman -is playing ‘yorkers’ by chopping down on them inside his crease, it -is as certain as can be that he is not at all at home with them, and -the bowler may hope for success with every one he tries. Even if the -bat does come down on a ‘yorker’ in the crease at the last moment, it -often dribbles on with the spin, and just dislodges the bails. The -only proper, workmanlike way to deal with ‘yorkers’ is to play them -forward. The bat should be thrust forward directly the ball is seen to -be right up to the batsman, and then it cannot fail to be stopped. One -great peculiarity of ‘yorkers’ is that it is impossible to bowl such a -ball to some batsmen. W. G. Grace hardly ever gets one; directly the -ball leaves the bowler’s hand he sees its destination, viz. an inch -inside the crease; he puts the bat out to meet the ball, and makes it -one of the easiest possible, viz. a full-pitch. If there were no such -thing as misjudgment on the part of a batsman, there would be no such -thing as a ‘yorker.’ It depends for its very existence on being taken -for something else. If every batsman were perfectly accurate in his -sight and judgment of pitch, every so-called ‘yorker’ would be neither -more nor less than a ‘full-pitch.’ However, as every batsman, we are -thankful to say, is liable to err in judging the pitch, and as nearly -every batsman when first going in is more liable to err with a ‘yorker’ -than any other ball, the bowler should most decidedly try it. A slow -bowler should first try a medium-paced ‘yorker,’ somewhat faster than -his usual pace, and then a slower one. It is astonishing how many -wickets fall to slow ‘yorkers;’ the ball is mistaken for everything but -what it really is, viz. a full-pitch--for every ball pitching inside -the crease must be playable as a full-pitch. - -When a bowler is put on to bowl by his captain, it is his duty to do -everything in his power to dislodge the batsman. It is really quite a -secondary consideration for him whether many or few runs are being made -off his bowling. It is the duty of the captain to tell the bowler when -he wants the pace in the run-getting to be diminished, and then, and -not till then, must the bowler begin to bowl straight and short with -that object. But until certain instructions are given, the bowler must -never stop for an instant in his endeavour to get the batsman’s wicket. -If he has experimented with every one of his arts and is unsuccessful, -or even if he becomes too expensive in run-getting before he has done -this, the captain’s duty is to take him off. - -It is a common sight enough to see a bowler put on in a match who -simply dare not try the experiments which he has practised with -success, for fear of being hit for a four or two and taken off. He is -quite content to see ball after ball played full in the middle of the -bat straight back to him, knowing well that with such bowling he has -not the remotest chance of getting a wicket. In the hopes of getting -a wicket a slow bowler should often try leg half-volleys; they are, -of course, delightful balls for a batsman to hit, but, at the present -day, when the old George Parr leg hit is comparatively unknown--viz. to -fine long-leg all along the ground well behind the wicket--and the leg -hitting off slows is generally high and square, they often result in a -long-leg catch, and sometimes one at the wicket, through the batsman -hitting too quick at the ball. A bowler who has been sending down ball -after ball with the off break on should often try pitching one on the -same spot but without the break; the batsman is very apt to play inside -this ball, and place it in short-slip’s hands. In addition to the -change of pace which we have above commented on, it is a most excellent -thing occasionally to lower and heighten the action. Alfred Shaw used -continually, by lowering his action, to send in a ball which skimmed, -so to speak, from the pitch at a great pace, and much faster than his -ordinary balls. The raising of the arm higher than usual makes the ball -bound higher, which is very often an advantage, especially on rough -cut-up grounds. The good-length ball outside the off stump, pitched -perhaps eight inches to a foot wide of it, and without any break on -at all, is often a most telling ball, especially to eager, excitable -batsmen. The ball, not being straight, cannot be met with the full face -of the bat, and consequently, unless the batsman puts his left leg -right across the wicket, he must, in playing it, lift it up in the air, -when it is probably captured by cover-point or mid-off. If this ball -can be made to go ever so little from the leg side after it has pitched -it becomes more deadly, as then there is a much greater chance of the -batsman being unable to get over the ball sufficiently to keep it along -the ground. - -There has grown up in late years a most deplorable practice amongst -batsmen of leaving balls on the off side alone, for fear of risking -their wickets. In every match, big and little, one may see batsmen jump -in front of their wickets time after time to off balls, allowing the -ball to go by unplayed at, or if it twists to hit their legs. We call -this a most deplorable practice, because it is not real cricket. The -true object of the batsman is to defend his wicket with his bat; let -him use his legs as well if he likes, but his bat he should certainly -use, and when he holds the bat high in the air and guards his wicket -with his legs, and legs alone, in our opinion he goes beyond the limit -of legitimate batting. A batsman is perfectly right in refusing to hit -or play at wide balls on the off side, but when he remains passive to -balls a few inches only outside the off stump, he not only acknowledges -his want of confidence in himself, but also degrades the dignity of -a cricket bat by substituting in its place his own usually nervous -legs. We remember seeing, some years back, a batsman who had completed -his hundred refusing, on a perfectly good wicket, to play ball after -ball on the off side. The famous old bowler David Buchanan was bowling -at one end, and could not understand how some of his most lovely -half-volleys were allowed to pass by unlooked at and despised. The -batsman, however, was thoroughly well roasted by his own side and the -other for his tame play; and it was satisfactory afterwards to learn -that he had given up his weakness for seeing long-hops and half-volleys -pass on the off without being first heavily taxed for the good of his -side. It is rather a difficult thing for a slow bowler to know what to -do when he has to bowl to a batsman of this sort. He might, of course, -go on bowling on the off side, and try to tire the batsman out and -make him play; but this, in these present days of good wickets and -lengthy matches, would take far too long. The best course for a bowler -to take is continually to alter his pace, and endeavour by pitching a -ball sharper from the pitch and quicker than usual on the off stump to -get the batsman out leg before wicket. Just the very slightest degree -outside the off stump is also a good place for this class of player; he -gets undecided whether to adopt his mawkish style of play or not, and -in his indecision is apt to make mistakes. - -A favourite scheme for a slow bowler to get rid of a batsman is by -bowling him off his legs. This is always more easy of accomplishment -when the batsman’s legs stand some distance from the leg-stump and his -bat. When this is going to be tried an extra man should be put out on -the on side between long-leg and deep field-on, as the ball which is to -be bowled will, if hit by the batsman, generally go in that direction. -If the bowler can dispense with a long-leg, it is advantageous to have -a short-leg, perhaps a yard or two in front of the umpire, and also a -mid-wicket on as near to the batsman as he can with safety venture. The -ball should then be bowled with as much off break and as good a length -as possible, in a line with the leg-stump; if played at and missed on -account of the twist it hits the legs, and so cannons into the wicket. -If it is met with the bat there is always a chance of the twist taking -it into the hands of short-leg or mid-on. The place on which the ball -pitches must depend on the state of the ground and the amount of twist -that can be put on to the ball. - -Spofforth, the Australian, was a bowler who used this ball very -successfully, as indeed he did most others. When he had the ground -in a suitable state--i.e. when it was sticky or else crumbled and -loose--he used to place a short-leg close in to the batsman about two -yards behind the wicket; he would also have another short-leg or mid-on -close in to the batsman and fairly straight. He would then bowl about -medium pace, pitching ball after ball a good length on the leg-stump, -and with as much off break as he could get on, which, of course, would -vary with the state of the ground. The result of this manœuvre was -to make the batsman’s chance of remaining at the wickets for long -extremely doubtful. The pace (medium) would compel him to play forward -to all good-length balls; the break-back and abrupt rise or kick then -made it very probable that he would either place the ball in the hands -of one of the expectant short-legs or else be bowled off his bat or -legs. The author recollects on one occasion having to play against the -redoubtable Spofforth under the above circumstances. After receiving a -few balls he came to the conclusion that it was absolutely impossible -to prevent being captured by one of the short-legs, who were both -standing ridiculously close, and every ball was rising uncomfortably -high. He determined to take the liberty of pulling, and did so once -or twice with success, till he paid the usual penalty of the practice -on a kicking wicket by being badly cut over. He then tried jumping in -front of his wicket and trying to slide the breaking balls off his bat -to very fine long-leg. Spofforth, however, was too much for him, and -almost immediately bowled a straight middle stump ball without any -break on it and rather faster than the others; it kept low, hit the -shin, and there was as dead a case of ‘l.b.w.’ as any bowler could wish -for. - -A favourite trick of some slow bowlers is to bowl from different -distances. Sometimes the bowler will have one leg behind the wickets -and the other in front, and sometimes both behind; we have even seen -some bowl occasionally with the front leg as much as two yards behind -the wicket. The object of this is to deceive the batsman as to the -pitch of the ball by changing the distance the ball has to travel. -This is doubtless an excellent theory, but in our opinion it is not -of much worth in actual practice. We have seen bowlers of all sorts -repeatedly try this experiment, but in our experience it never meets -with any appreciable success. This is perhaps owing to the fact that -the batsman can always see very clearly when the bowler does not come -up the whole way to the wicket, and is accordingly on the alert for a -shorter pitched ball than usual. The only practiser of this trick who -ever seems to turn it to good account is Tom Emmett, the left-handed -Yorkshire veteran; he usually bowls his slow wides from some distance -behind the crease, and certainly obtains a fair share of wickets with -these balls; but even in his case we think that it is generally not so -much the difference in the distance that the ball has to travel which -causes disaster to the batsman, as the latter’s anxiety and impatience -to score from slow wide off balls, which look so easy and are really -so deadly. However, though our opinion of this bowler’s ‘dodge’ is -not particularly high, we still think it is worthy of trial at times -by every slow bowler. A slow bowler should try every wile that can -possibly be attempted; by adopting slow bowling he has undertaken to -use the ‘wisdom of the serpent’ in the guise of the ‘harmlessness of -the dove,’ and has sacrificed pace to cunning and thought. No slow -bowler is worth his salt who merely tosses the ball into the air and -trusts to chance for success, even if it has a little spin on it; he -must continually think and diagnose every particular case which comes -before him, and then adopt the measures necessary for each one. With -this object it is the duty of every slow bowler to take advantage of -any local peculiarity which the size and situation of the ground may -afford. He should almost always have the choice of ends, except on -occasions when the captain of the side considers that for some reason -his fast bowler is more likely to get rid of the batting side for a -small score than the slow, and then, of course, the fast must have the -choice. - -For example, in the University matches from 1878 to 1881, Oxford was -so overmatched by Cambridge that in each of these years before the play -began it was considered by the outside public as a foregone conclusion -for the latter. The really knowing ones, however, who thoroughly -understood the game, were aware that there was one man on the Oxford -side who might any day get rid of the best side in England for a very -small score. That man was Mr. Evans, the famous fast bowler. He was the -only man on the side who, humanly speaking, seemed capable of turning -the chances of the game. He consequently chose his own particular -end--the one he thought most suited to his style, quite irrespective of -any mediocre slow bowler that was on his side; and the havoc he played -amongst the Cambridge wickets for those four years may be seen from the -old scores. It is, however, an exception when a side depends almost -entirely on its fast bowling, and it is only when this exception arises -that a slow bowler (assuming him to be one who is competent to judge) -must not have his choice of ends. Of course we mean his choice of ends -at the commencement of an innings, as after that it is the captain’s -duty to put any bowler on at either end, and it is the duty of every -bowler to obey his captain cheerfully. - -As already remarked, every slow bowler should take advantage of every -local peculiarity that may offer itself. For instance, there may be a -ground where a high tree is behind one of the wickets; the slow bowler, -if he thinks this tree will help him at all, should take his measures -accordingly. We hope none will think we are advocating anything at -all unfair in the game, or anything that is even on the line between -fairness and ‘not quite straight.’ As a rifle-shooter takes advantage -of a lull in the wind to pull his trigger, as a deerstalker of every -rock and unevenness of ground to approach his game--in short, just -as in every kind of sport natural facilities may be utilised--so in -bowling every peculiarity of time and place should be enlisted on the -side of the bowler in his (in these days of good wickets and good -batting) by no means easy task of getting rid of the batsman. If a -bowler, who, we will say, usually bowls over the wicket, perceive that -by bowling round the wicket he may make his bowling more difficult to -see, and consequently more effective, on account of a tree, house, or -hedge that is directly behind that side of the wicket, he should most -certainly change and make the most of that advantage. An injudicious -and talkative batsman often materially assists a bowler by such remarks -as, ‘I can’t see your bowling a little bit. When tossed high in the air -that beastly tree is right behind;’ or, ‘When you bowl over the wicket -the ball gets right in a line with the dark windows of the pavilion, -and I can’t see it at all.’ Can anyone imagine for a moment that a -bowler will not do his very best instantly to make the most of the dark -branches of the tree or the windows of the pavilion? The sun, too, -often materially assists a slow bowler, especially during the last hour -or hour and a half of the day’s play. If there are any trees round the -ground, the shadows, beginning to lengthen, will often lie right across -the pitch, and if there is one anywhere near where a good-length ball -should pitch, it is advisable to try pitching one occasionally on it. -If the sun is behind the bowler’s wicket and getting a little low, the -bowler should try by bowling high slow ones to get it in the line of -the batsman’s vision. Every possible advantage within the limits and -spirit of fair play may be considered legitimate for a bowler. Local -advantages of ground and weather are certainly within these limits, but -any peculiarity of dress or tricks of manner, which are in themselves -calculated to baulk or annoy a batsman, are not. - -For example, bowling with a long loose and flapping sleeve in order -to distract the batsman’s attention from the ball, a habit which of -late has been seen on our English grounds, is in itself intrinsically -unfair and unworthy of any true cricketer. And again, waving the arms -behind the ball after it has been delivered, or any other trick adopted -in order to worry or harass the batsman, is manifestly unfair. Some -batsmen are extremely fastidious, and are distracted by the merest -trifle. The writer remembers on one occasion taking part in a match -when a batsman objected to a bowler on the ground that he was wearing -a stud made of some bright material or stone, which glistened so in -the sun that it diverted his attention from the ball. This, of course, -sounded absurd, but the bowler at once removed the glittering nuisance, -and rightly too. - -A slow bowler must bear in mind what has before been mentioned, viz. -that it is often almost as good as a change of bowling to change -from over to round the wicket, or _vice versâ_, quite apart from -the advantage he may gain from any local obstruction to good light. -Supposing a slow bowler has been ‘on’ for some time over the wicket, as -a rule the great majority of his balls have been pitched a few inches -outside the off stump and breaking in to the middle or middle and leg. -The batsman has got thoroughly into the way of playing this particular -ball, and does not show any signs of making a mistake. The bowler goes -round the wicket, and although he still continues to pitch a little -outside the off stump, the ball is quite different now from what it -was from over the wicket. It is, of course, impossible to get as much -‘break-back’ spin on to the ball when bowling round as over the wicket, -because the ball is delivered several feet from a straight line between -the two wickets, but in most conditions of the ground it is possible -to get a certain amount on. The change in the direction of the ball, -or rather in the spot from which it is delivered, combined with the -diminution in the amount of break, makes it often a most effective -change and one well worth the trial. In addition there is always from -round the wicket the chance of a batsman playing inside a ball which, -delivered without any spin at all, keeps going across the wicket, as it -is technically called, ‘with the arm.’ - -[Illustration: A pokey batsman dealing with a high-dropping full-pitch.] - -We cannot omit, when enumerating the different balls of which a slow -bowler may avail himself, one which is by no means used as often as -it should be, viz. the full-pitch. In slow bowling there are three -different kinds of full-pitches--the high-dropping full-pitch, which -will pitch either on the top of the wicket or a few inches before it; -the ordinary slow full-pitch, which reaches the batsman about the -height of his knees; and the medium-paced full-pitch, which will hit -the stumps nearly at the top. The high-dropping full-pitch is a ball -that is seldom used, the reason for its rarity probably being the -extreme difficulty of bowling it accurately and the certain punishment -it will meet with if it falls at all short either in height or length -of what it should be. It should be delivered as high as possible; there -is no limit to the height this ball may go in the air, as the higher -it ascends the more difficult it is to play. It should be bowled so -that it reaches its highest point when it is almost directly over the -head of the batsman, and should pitch on the very top of the stumps. -It is strange that this ball is not more often practised by slow -bowlers, as, especially to the pokey, nervous style of batsmen, it is -fraught with considerable uneasiness and requires some skill to play -properly. To really first-class punishing batsmen it is a ball which -has comparatively no terrors, and on which not much reliance can be -placed, though it should always, in our opinion, be tried at least once -to every batsman who is getting ‘well set.’ But to the poker, the man -who refuses to do anything but stick his bat in front of the wicket, -who lets half-volleys, full-pitches, and long-hops pass unscathed and -unplayed on both sides of him--to him who considers he is doing his -side good service by wasting three hours of valuable time for a dozen -runs on his side of the balance, and three hours’ wear and tear of the -wicket on the other--to him who helps so greatly to fill up the records -of drawn matches, the high-dropping full-pitch is an excellent ball. He -does not know what to do with it; he is afraid to step back to play it -for fear of hitting his wicket, and he hardly likes to be so bold as to -try to cut or hit it on the on side. One of the most amusing sights we -have ever seen at cricket was one of these batsmen having ball after -ball of this sort bowled to him; it was not till after he had nearly -lost his wicket a dozen times, only keeping it by exceptional good -luck, and had afforded the greatest merriment to players and spectators -alike, that he burst out from sheer desperation into wild and furious -hitting--a line of conduct which had the immediate effect of compelling -the bowler to desist from his lofty attacks. - -The second kind of full-pitch--the one reaching the batsman about the -height of his knees--is the most usual of full-pitches, and enjoys the -distinction of being considered the easiest of all balls to hit. A -good batsman can hit this ball from a slow bowler to almost any part -of the field; consequently, though it often happens in the chapter of -accidents that a wicket falls to this ball--a catch in the country -perhaps, or a hard catch and bowl--it is of all balls the very worst -for a slow bowler to deliver, except perhaps a long hop. - -The third kind--the medium-paced full-pitch straight to the top of -the stumps--is occasionally, for a slow bowler, a very useful ball. In -the first place, it is not quite so easy to hit as it appears to the -batsman; the change in pace from slow to medium often causes him to -hit a trifle slower than he should do, when the ball, coming on faster -than expected, hits the top or splice of the bat, and goes straight up -in the air. This ball is generally more successful with players who -have a partiality for on-side hitting than with others, as it is never -a difficult one to play quietly; it is only when the batsman tries to -hit that it becomes likely to get a wicket. It is also useful when a -hitter, by running out and hitting every ball, is demoralising bowler, -fielders, and the whole side. If the bowler sees the intention of the -hitter to run out before the ball is delivered--and he is often able -to do this--he can do nothing better than bowl a good medium-paced -full-pitch straight at the top of the middle stump; if the batsman goes -on with his intention of running out, he is not only apt to overrun -this faster than usual ball, and let it pass over the top of his bat, -but if he does hit it he is likely to send it high in the air, from -the above-mentioned cause of catching it with the top or splice of the -bat. There is, however, nothing so flurrying to a bowler as a batsman -who runs out to every ball, and who evinces his intention of doing -so before the ball is delivered. The writer has often talked with -old cricketers on this subject, and they have remarked how well the -old bowlers of their early days used to keep their heads under these -trying circumstances. Doubtless they deserve the very greatest credit -for doing so, for there is nothing so trying to a bowler; it spoils -his pitch, and is rather apt to do the same to his temper. The regular -attendant at matches may have seen almost every bowler of reputation in -England so thoroughly flurried and upset by a batsman doing this, that, -in spite of all efforts to keep cool, the bowling was simply paralysed -and rendered useless to the side for the time being. The best courses -for a slow bowler to pursue on these occasions is, 1st, to bowl the -sort of full-pitch just discussed; and, 2nd, to increase his pace a -little, and bowl a little short of a good length, about a foot or more -outside the legs of the batsman. There is nothing a rushing-out batsman -finds so hard to hit as a ball well outside his legs. - -Widish off balls are also useful, as a batsman going down the wicket is -not only apt to miss, but also, if he can reach, to sky them. A high -full-pitch into the hands of the wicket-keeper is likewise sometimes -successful; but, though we may lay down certain rules and suggestions -as to what is best for a bowler to do at this very trying time, we are -afraid that, unless he is able to keep exceptionally cool, they will be -of no practical assistance. - -The variableness of the English climate plays a very important part -in the success or otherwise of slow bowlers. A shower of rain in the -night often has the effect of making particularly deadly a slow bowler -who, the day before, on a hard and fast ground, was comparatively -harmless and ineffective. Up to 1884 the disadvantage of a rainfall in -the night to a side that had begun but not finished its innings was -increased by the rule forbidding the ground to be rolled except before -the commencement of each innings. Rain in the night not only softens -the ground, but brings up to the surface numbers of worms, which cover -the pitch with little heaps of earth mould. These little heaps, in the -absence of any rolling, made the ground bumpy and treacherous, and -consequently entailed serious discomfiture to the batting side. The -only plausible argument ever advanced for this injustice was that it -might happen to either side, and was one of the chances of the game. -However, the M.C.C. wisely decided, though not till quite recently, -that this rule should be abolished, the reason for the decision being -that the side which won the toss had a great advantage as it was, from -having the first and best of the wicket, and that, as the other side -was usually batting at the end of the day, it gave the men an extra -and unfair disadvantage in having the wicket spoilt by rain and worms -without the chance of having it rolled. No rule, however, can affect -the drawback under which a batting side is placed whose wicket is -softened by a heavy rainfall in the night. The roller may level the -worm moulds, but it cannot alter the slow, sticky state of the ground; -in fact, it often brings up more water, and makes the pitch still more -sticky and slow. It is on occasions such as these that slow bowlers -meet with their greatest success. So frequently during the course of -the season do these soft wickets occur, even in what are called our hot -summers, that it is part of the science of bowling to know how to turn -such grounds to the best advantage. The different states of the ground -caused by the weather may be roughly, and for all practical purposes, -divided into five: 1st, the hard and dry state; 2nd, the hard state, -with the grass wet; 3rd, the very soft and slow state, (_a_) with the -grass dry, (_b_) with the grass wet; 4th, the drying state, when it has -been very slow and soft, but is gradually drying under the influence -of a hot sun or wind; 5th, the hard and crumbled state. The hard and -dry state calls for no comment, as everything written on the subject -of bowling, unless otherwise specified, refers to the ground in this -condition. The hard state, with the grass wet, is perhaps the most -trying time for a slow bowler. He has to bowl with a wet ball, which -he has great difficulty in holding; he cannot get on the slightest -degree of twist, as the wet ball slips off the wet grass directly it -pitches, allowing no time for the ball to ‘bite’ the ground and take -the twist. A good batsman on these wickets knows that all he has to do -is to play forward with a straight bat when the ball is anything like -a good one, and he is bound to meet it. The slippery ball flies off -the bat like lightning, and travels, if the grass is short and not too -thick, over the hard ground faster than it does when the grass is dry. -Every now and then a ball may be inclined to keep low or shoot; but a -shooter does not possess the same terrors on a wet as on a dry ground, -because in almost every instance it can be played forward to, and a -good batsman in playing forward always keeps his bat low enough to stop -shooters (especially on wet wickets) until he actually sees the ball -rise. - -The only course for a slow bowler to adopt on these wickets is to bowl -as good a length as he can, and as straight as possible. He should also -bear in mind that the ball leaves the ground far more quickly than -usual in its wet, slippery state, and that, consequently, the most -likely place in the field to capture a batsman is short-slip. Easy as -the ground is for a batsman when once he gets the pace of it, it often -happens that at first he is surprised at the great pace from the pitch, -plays back instead of forward, and places the ball in the slips. It -is a golden rule for every bowler, slow and fast, on these wickets -to have short-slip ‘finer’ than on ordinary occasions, and a trifle -further back. It is often advisable to have an extra man standing about -three yards squarer than the regular short-slip, but no farther from -the wicket. Two quick active men, who are capable at times of bringing -off smart one-hand catches, should be chosen for these places. They -are by far the most likely men in the field to dismiss good batsmen -on wet hard wickets; in fact, it is often difficult to see how two -such batsmen are to be separated on these occasions except by a catch -at one of these places, or at the wicket. A bowler should with this -object keep bowling a good length on the off stump and just outside it, -recollecting that good-length balls must pitch considerably shorter -than usual on these very quick wickets. - -The very soft and slow state is the result of heavy rain which has -left the surface of the pitch dry, but the ground itself thoroughly -sodden. This condition of the ground is popularly supposed to favour -a slow bowler. How often, on coming on to the ground to inspect the -wicket after a night’s rain, is he accosted something in this style: -‘Well, Jack, this ought to suit you; those twisters of yours will want -some watching to-day!’ Jack, after looking at the pitch, which is as -soft and sodden as a piece of dough, knows full well that it will be a -long time before the ground gets back enough of its half-drowned life -to help him in the slightest degree. There is no poorer fun for a slow -bowler than having to bowl on these utterly lifeless wickets. On a -hard true ground, though it may be favourable to the batsman, he has -good sport in trying every dodge he can think of; he fishes and feeds -and angles as warily as Izaak Walton himself; the ground and ball are -full of life and go, and very often, unfortunately for the bowler, the -batsman too. On wet hard wickets, when he can get no twist on, there -is still life and pace in the ground; but in the sodden dead state, -directly the ball touches the ground it sinks in, loses all life and -pace, and comes on to the batsman like what a Yorkshire professional -was once heard to call a ‘diseased lawn-tennis ball.’ There is no -greater fallacy at cricket than to suppose that a sodden wicket is an -advantage to a slow bowler. The time when it begins to assist him is -when the surface is ‘caking’ under the influence of the sun or a drying -wind; and then it is that, as we said above, the greatest successes of -slow bowlers are met with. A slow bowler having to bowl on a sodden -wicket perceives at once that it is extremely difficult for him to bowl -to a good batsman a ‘good-length’ ball for the following reasons:-- - -What is called a ‘good-length’ ball on ordinary occasions remains on -the ground so long and comes off the pitch so slow that a batsman, if -he is so minded, can with ease play it back--i.e. he can see it coming -on from the pitch in time for him to get back and play it as a simple -‘long-hop.’ Anything short of this will all the more be capable of -being played as a ‘long-hop.’ If the ball is pitched farther than a -good length, it becomes at once--certainly to batsmen quick on their -legs--a half-volley. Thus, if a batsman really gets the time of the -ground, he has only to play these two simplest of balls. No amount of -spin will help the bowler; the ball in the soft ground may twist at -right angles, but it does it so slowly that the batsman has ample time -to defend his wicket. In these circumstances there is only one thing -for a slow bowler to do, and that is to bowl faster and endeavour, by -giving extra pace to the ball, to make it come off the ground quicker. -There are some batsmen whom, on these sodden wickets, it is almost -impossible to get rid of. They remain for hours, perfectly contented if -a whole day is taken up with their innings and forty runs added to the -total, the chances of a draw being thereby greatly augmented. A famous -professional stick, on one occasion, remained at the wickets when the -ground was sodden for one hour and fifty minutes before troubling the -scorer; he was then so flustered by the jeering of the mob that he -rushed out, hit a catch, was missed, and, amidst as much cheering as if -he had wanted one run to complete his hundred, broke his duck’s-egg. -Louis Hall, of Yorkshire, was a desperate man to bowl to on these -grounds; every ball that was bowled he either played back or smothered. -Nothing in cricket could be more dull or dismal than bowling to this -batsman on a sodden wicket at Bramall Lane Ground in a real Sheffield -fog. A. Bannerman, the Australian batsman, is another terrible hard nut -for a bowler to crack on these sodden wickets. - -Although, as has been said, slow bowlers are not assisted by the ground -when in this condition, and it is extremely difficult to bowl anything -approaching a good ball to a good batsman, there are some batsmen, and -real good ones too on a hard true ground, who are utterly unable to -adapt their style of play to a slow ground, or rather never can realise -that a ball pitched into a lump of dough will leave it much slower than -when pitched on to a stone. These batsmen, if they kept their keenness -of eye and activity till they were a hundred, would still be seen -playing a quick forward stroke on the sodden ground, sending the ball -up in the air in every direction. A batsman who persists in playing -forward on a dead wicket and finishing his stroke as he would do on a -fast wicket is certain not to last long. It is very curious to notice -how sometimes nearly a whole batting side will make a mistake about -the condition of the wicket. The first batsmen see the ground slow and -the ball twisting a good deal, and begin playing as they would do on a -faster wicket, viz. playing forward to the pitch instead of waiting and -playing a back game. Four or five batsmen will follow, play in the same -style, and lose their wickets, generally bowled, or caught and bowled. -Some batsman will then come in who at once finds out what the slow -bowlers have long since known--that it is a slow easy wicket he has to -bat on, and not a ‘caked,’ ‘kicky’ one. What happens? He plays every -ball back except those that he hits, and he hits everything except a -long-hop, because he can get to the pitch of anything else. The slow -bowlers who have been doing the mischief are soon knocked off, and -his side, in spite of the failure of its four or five most competent -batsmen, makes a good score. On one occasion in a first-class match -the first seven wickets fell for fifty runs, the wicket being deadly -slow and dull; the eighth man came in, and, by dint of playing back and -hitting and a little luck, made over a hundred in about an hour and a -half, being fortunate enough to have some one to stick in with him at -the other end. - -When the ground is very soft and the grass wet, the bowler is in -about the same position as when the grass is wet on a hard wicket; -he has to bowl with a wet slippery ball, and cannot get any twist at -all upon it. This is called the ‘cutting through’ state, which means -that, the ball being slippery and the ground and grass wet, it cuts -through the surface of the pitch, taking with it a small piece of wet -sticky turf. As in the hard state with wet grass, short-slip is an -important place and likely to get chances. Although the ground when -in this condition is in favour of the batsman, cricket is miserable -under such circumstances, and is enjoyed neither by batsman, bowler, -nor fielders. The batsman cannot stand on the slippery mud; the bowler, -with wet dirty hands, and boots and trousers bespattered with slush, is -utterly unable to do anything with the slimy ball; and the fieldsmen -can neither hold nor stop it. The ground is covered with sawdust, -without the use of which it would be impossible for the bowler to grasp -the ball firmly, and altogether the whole scene is so unlike cricket, -essentially a fine-weather game, that it always seems a pity under such -conditions to go on playing. - -The drying state, when the ground has been very soft and sodden, but -is gradually drying and caking on the surface under the influence of a -hot sun or wind, is the time when slow bowlers have it all their own -way. It is on this condition of ground that in former days bowlers -like Alfred Shaw, and Peate, of Yorkshire, and in present times -Tyler, Briggs, and Wainwright, have so often astonished the cricket -community with wonderful analyses. When the ground has got into this -state, it will often remain so for several hours. At Lord’s, when the -ground after being soft has become caked on the top, it is no unusual -occurrence to see thirty good wickets or more fall in the course of the -day. When a side, no matter how many really good batsmen it may number, -has to go in on ‘caked’ wickets against good bowling, they may think -themselves lucky if they get 100 runs. The ball takes almost as much -twist as a bowler wants to put on; it comes off the ground at different -paces, one part of the pitch being a trifle drier and harder than -another. The first ball of the over will perhaps get up almost straight -and very quickly from the pitch as a batsman is playing it; the next -pitches a trifle shorter, may stop in the ground, and ‘get up and look -at you,’ as it is called, making correct play an impossibility. Or -perhaps one ball will get up very quickly and high, and hit the batsman -on the arm or side, and the next, pitched in almost the same spot, -will leave the pitch equally quickly, but never rise more than an inch -from the ground. It is no recommendation to a bowler to be able to get -wickets on such grounds as these; any bad bowler might bowl a good -batting side out for a small score with such assistance. The only way -a batsman can reasonably hope to add any notches to the score of his -side is to grasp the situation at once, throw careful correct play to -the winds, and hit, pull, and slog in every direction where he thinks -he can get rid of the teasing ball. The Australian eleven of 1882 were -particularly good on this class of wicket; they had four men--Giffen, -Bonnor, McDonnell, Massie--who, rarely needing much inducement to hit, -used to launch out most vigorously and successfully on these occasions, -often cracking up twenty or thirty runs in about half the number of -minutes, and securing victory for their side. - -Although very badly caked wickets are not uncommon, perhaps the best -for bowling and the worst for batting in modern experience was at the -Oval during the last innings of the England _v._ Australia match, in -1882. It is the only disastrous match for England in the whole list -of national fixtures that have been played in this country. It may be -remembered that England, having only a few runs to get to win, nearly -made them for the first two wickets, Grace and Ulyett both making about -twenty. The ground at this time was drying and becoming every minute -more difficult, and the way in which our English wickets were mowed -down by Spofforth is now a matter of cricket history, too well known to -repeat. Spofforth was bowling rather more than medium pace, bringing -the ball back a foot or more very quickly from the pitch, sometimes -kicking to the height of the batsman’s head, and at others shooting. -Some of our cricket reporters talked in an airy manner about the ‘funk’ -of the English team on that occasion, but the charge was wholly without -foundation. A batsman’s consciousness that twenty thousand spectators -were watching each ball with breathless interest, and that on his own -individual efforts depended the reputation of English cricket, that -the bowling was about as good and the ground as bad as any cricketer -had ever seen, might, and probably did, cause a feeling of intense -anxiety in the minds of each of the English players who failed in his -efforts to win victory for his side; but to say that their efforts were -paralysed, or that any one of them was unnerved by what is popularly -called ‘funk,’ is certainly unjust to the well-tried cricketers who did -battle for England on that memorable and disastrous occasion. - -The hard and crumbled wicket is perhaps almost more difficult for -batsmen than when it is caked. The ball will twist a great deal on this -class of wicket, and does it very quickly. It is also inclined both to -‘pop’ and keep low. Spofforth and Turner of the Australian bowlers, and -Peel, Briggs, and Attewell of the English ones, are all most deadly -bowlers on such a wicket as this. - -Some of our most successful slow bowlers have been left-handed. The -peculiarity and difficulty about left-hand bowling is that the natural -spin imparted to the ball by a left-handed bowler is the off-spin, -which, of course, makes the ball after the pitch twist from the leg -side of the right-handed batsman to the off. This, as we have mentioned -above, is the most difficult twist for a batsman to play, as an off -break is more easy to watch after the pitch than a leg-break. The -leg-break which a batsman has to meet from a right-handed bowler is not -so difficult to play as that from a left-hander; because, first, the -latter is usually faster than the former, and, secondly, it is much -more disguised. The right-hand leg-break is impossible without getting -the ball in the centre of the hand and screwing the hand round just -as if it were twisting a corkscrew the reverse way--an action which -at once prepares the batsman for the leg twist. Thirdly, because it -usually twists very much less than the right-hand leg-break. It is not -the ball which twists the most that gets the wickets; it is the ball -that just twists enough to beat the bat. - -The mode of attack generally adopted by a slow left hander is to place -all his men, with the exception of a short-leg and a deep mid-on, on -the off side. He then proceeds to bowl on the off stump and outside -it, making the ball go away from the batsman to the off as much as -possible after the pitch. Great care has to be taken by the batsman, -as the slightest mistake in hitting or forward play will give a catch -to one of the numerous traps laid all round on the off side. It is the -object of the bowler to get the batsman either to hit at a ball which -is not quite far enough to be smothered, or to reach out and play -forward at one which is a little beyond his reach. A favourite device -of the left-handed bowler is to get the batsman to hit at widish ones -on the off side, a stroke that must cause an uppish hit somewhere, -as it is impossible for a batsman to smother a ball that is a trifle -out of his reach. It is often a good thing for a left-handed bowler -to send down a ball without any twist on it at all, especially if he -is bowling on a wicket where he is able to ‘do’ a good deal. The ball -without any spin on it should pitch on the middle and off stumps; and -if the bowler is bowling from round the wicket, as left-handers usually -do, it will then come on in a line with the pitch and the hand at the -moment of delivery, and if not stopped by the bat, take the leg-stump. -This slow ball that comes with the arm in the middle of others going -the other way is very successful. Slow left-handed bowlers often have -their tempers sorely tried by a class of batsmen that were discussed in -a previous portion of this chapter, namely, those who are so frightened -of getting out that they will never play at an off ball, long-hop, -half-volley, or good-length. There are many enticing balls bowled by -left-handed bowlers that ought to be left alone by every batsman, -notably those that pitch too wide to enable them to be played forward -and smothered. There is no greater or more successful trap for wild -young players than these widish off balls. But it is indeed a trying -time for the bowler when he keeps pitching just outside the off stump, -and is not even played at by the batsman. Bowlers should, in these -circumstances, bowl ball after ball on the off stump and just outside -it. It is by no means an uncommon occurrence to see these punishing -batsmen taken in by a ball that comes in a little with the arm, and -removes the bail while they are striking an attitude, bat over shoulder. - -We have had some excellent left-handed bowlers in England, and there -can be no doubt that every team should possess one of this sort if -possible. Peate for some years enjoyed the reputation of being the -best left-hander in England, and rightly so. He was an exceptional -good length, difficult to see, and had a lot of work on. Some of his -performances against the Australians are truly wonderful. When Peate -first began to play cricket he was a very fast, high-actioned bowler, -and the writer remembers finding him on the slow sticky wicket of -the Carlisle ground very nasty to play. He subsequently altered his -pace to slow, and it is a remarkable fact that after this alteration -he completely lost the power of sending down a really fast ball. -Another of our great slow left-handed bowlers was David Buchanan, and, -strangely enough, he too was in his early days a fast bowler. As one of -the slow school he is best known, and we have no doubt that he at the -present moment has taken nearly twice as many wickets in the course of -his career as any other living cricketer. His bowling was celebrated -for the great amount of work he got on to the ball; unless the batsman -was on the pitch of it, a mistake was certain. The only team that ever -seemed to enjoy Buchanan’s bowling was the Rugby boys, and constant -practice had robbed it of all terrors for them. - -It is a doubtful point amongst cricketers whether Peel of Yorkshire -or Briggs of Lancashire was the best left-handed slow to medium -bowler. In the writer’s opinion Peel was the best. He bowled perhaps -a slightly better length than Briggs, and as he had a more difficult -action to see, was not so easily hit by a resolute batsman as Briggs. -They were both, however, excellent bowlers, but both are now a little -past their prime. Briggs possesses a marvellous strength of wrist and -fingers, which give him great power of twist and pace. His very fast -ball is nearly as good as that of Palmer, the Australian. One of his -best performances was in England _v._ Australia at Lord’s in 1886. None -of the English bowlers on this occasion could do much with the ball -except Briggs. There is one Australian left-handed bowler who we regret -has never been seen on English cricket grounds--Tom Kendall. In 1878, -when the first colonial team visited this country, great accounts of -Kendall’s prowess with the ball had reached us. His name was included -in the list of the players whom we were led to expect, but for some -reason or other, though he did actually start with the team, he left it -at Adelaide or at some other port at which the ship touched. The writer -saw him and played against him in 1882 in Tasmania, and, though getting -on in years and rather on the big side for bowling, he was about as -nasty a left-hander as any batsman could wish to play. He had a high -action, changed his pace well, from slow to medium, and then to very -fast, had lots of work both ways on his slow and medium balls, and the -very fast ones went with the arm. When the writer saw him his length -was not as good as it might have been, or, from all accounts, as it -once was. His action reminded us rather of that excellent bowler J. C. -Shaw, in his day the best left-hander in England. - -In the first Australian team that visited this country, in 1878, -there was another left-handed slow bowler named Allan, about whom the -Australians themselves spread most extraordinary statements. It was -said that Allan, ‘the bowler of the century,’ as he was called in -Australia, possessed some of the most remarkable qualities. Rumour -declared his spin off the ground was so great that the slowest -ball came off up to the bat at ten times greater speed than it had -travelled to the pitch; that he could twist either way, to almost any -degree, at will, and that his bowling had a most remarkable curve in -the air, which rendered it most deadly. This left-handed bowler is -mentioned because, though his powers of bowling had, of course, been -greatly exaggerated, it was certainly most puzzling. He met with some -considerable success at the outset of the tour; but subsequently his -health gave way before the wearing work of cricket every day, and he -was unable to bowl at all. His bowling had a considerable amount of -spin, but what was the most extraordinary thing connected with it was -the inward curl in the air towards the body of the batsman, and then, -after the pitch, the outward twist of the ball. A ball that goes one -way in the air, and another after the pitch, is calculated to try the -mettle of the best batsman. It is a subject for regret that Allan, -through increasing years and his consequent inability to stand hard -work, has not accompanied any of the later teams, as his bowling was so -very different from anything we have ever seen at home. - -Does bowling curl or twist in the air? is a question we have often been -asked, and we have frequently heard disputes, by men who possessed some -considerable knowledge of the game, as to whether it was possible for -balls to travel thus or not. It seems almost incredible that men who -have over and over again handled the bat should doubt the tendency of -some kinds of bowling to twist or curl in the air. Nearly all leg-break -slow bowlers curl inwards towards the batsman before the pitch, and no -one who has ever played against W. G. Grace’s bowling can doubt that -the real secret of his success as a bowler has been in the peculiar -flight his action gives the ball, causing it to curl before it pitches. - -However, the question as to balls turning in the air has been -definitely settled by the American base-ball players. In this game the -pitcher throws one full-pitch after another to the batsman, and even -if the latter happen to be one of the best and most experienced in -the game he misses a considerable proportion of these full-pitches. -And why? because of the twist or curl in the air which the pitcher -imparts to the ball. A very interesting account is given by Mr. R. A. -Proctor in ‘Longman’s Magazine’ for June 1887 of a well-known English -cricketer’s failure to strike the full-pitches of one of the best -American pitchers. Time after time the bat struck the air and nothing -else; and this was simply owing to the curl the pitcher put on the -ball. Mr. Proctor scientifically explains the curl in the air, and it -may be of interest to insert a short extract from his article:-- - - When a ball (or in fact any missile) is advancing rapidly through the - air, there is formed in front of it a small aggregation of compressed - air. (In passing we may remark that the compressed air in front of an - advancing cannon ball has been rendered discernible--we can hardly - say visible--by instantaneous photography.) In shape the cushion of - air is conical or rather conoidal, if the ball is advancing without - spin; and therefore it resists the progress of the ball equally on - all sides, and only affects the ball’s velocity. The same is the case - if the ball is spinning on an axis lying along its course. But in the - case we have to consider, where the ball is spinning on an axis square - to its course, the cushion of compressed air formed by the advancing - ball has no longer this symmetrical shape. On the advancing side of - the spinning surface the air cannot escape so readily as it would if - there were no spin; on the other side it escapes more readily than it - would but for the spin. Hence the cushion of air is thrown towards - that side of the ball where the spin is forwards and removed from the - other side. The same thing then must happen as where a ball encounters - a cushion aslant. A ball driven squarely against a very soft cushion - plunges straight into it, turning neither to the right nor to the - left, or if deflected at all (as against a billiard cushion) comes - straight back on its course; but if driven aslant against the cushion, - it is deflected from the region of resistance. So with the base ball. - As the cushion of air against which it is advancing is not opposed - squarely to it, but is stronger on one side than on the other, the - ball is deflected from the region of greatest resistance. - -There is one style of slow bowling that has of late years almost -completely vanished from first-class cricket: we refer to under-hand -slows. When Ridley left off bowling lobs, about twelve years ago, -nobody except Humphreys attempted to bowl lobs, but in 1897 Jephson, -of Surrey, has introduced them again with some success, and we hope -he will prosper. As under-hand was at one time the only bowling that -was allowed by the rules of cricket, and as it met with a great amount -of success, even after the raising of the arm was permitted, it will -be as well to refer to the cause that has brought about its practical -abolition. This is owing to the increasing popularity of the game, -and the consequent great increase in the number of good batsmen. The -greatest under-hand bowler that ever played was probably William -Clarke, whose merits have been so often discussed in cricket writings -that it is unnecessary to repeat them here. In order to ascertain -the style of batsmen Clarke made his great reputation against, we -must refer to some one who has seen and known the great bowler and -conversed with those who were in the habit of playing against him. We -are told that Clarke had perfect accuracy of pitch, a quick rise from -the ground, and a good leg twist on his bowling. These attributes in -an under-arm bowler, most excellent as they are, would not nowadays, -with the present efficient state of batting, justify the name of the -possessor being placed in the first rank, because we consider no amount -of accuracy of pitch, twist, or anything else can ever secure this -coveted distinction to a bowler of this kind. Mr. Pycroft gives us -the information we require on the subject of batting against Clarke’s -bowling. He says with regard to Pilch, at that time the best batsman of -the day, ‘He played him back all day if he bowled short, and hit him -hard all along the ground whenever he over-pitched; and some times he -would go in to Clarke’s bowling, not to make a furious swipe, but to -“run him down” with a straight bat.’ - -Now this description of the play of a man who was able to meet -Clarke’s bowling is interesting to us, because it shows us that the -way in which the great bowler was played by one of the few who could -oppose him successfully is exactly the same method in which every good -batsmen of the present time _does_ play under-hand bowling. If any man -of to-day, chosen to take part in the Gentlemen _v._ Players match as -a batsman, were to endeavour to play under-hand bowling in any other -manner, he would be laughed at as being devoid of the most elementary -rules of the game. Mr. Pycroft goes on to tell us the way which many -did adopt in playing Clarke. He says, ‘This going in to Clarke’s -bowling some persons thought necessary for every ball, forgetting that -discretion is the better part of cricket; the consequence was that -_many wickets fell_ from positive long-hops.’ This description shows -that a great number of those who fell victims to Clarke’s bowling -were absolutely uninitiated in the first principles of playing slows, -viz. never to hit except on the volley, or just as the ball pitches. -Nowadays every batsman--at any rate all who play in first-class -cricket--knows the danger of playing wildly at under-hand ‘lobs,’ -as they are called. Occasional mistakes are made, no doubt, when an -unexpected lob bowler appears, but more from wildness and anxiety to -score than from any ignorance as to the mode of playing such balls. The -way to play lobs is exactly the method Mr. Pycroft tells us was adopted -by the great Fuller Pilch. - -Slow lobs have therefore in first-class cricket died a natural death, -and although we may expect to find a lob bowler occasionally cropping -up here and there, we do not think there is much prospect of seeing an -exemplar of this style who will ever attain the rank of a first-class -bowler such as that acquired by Clarke, Mr. V. E. Walker, and Tinley. -Mr. A. W. Ridley was the last well-known amateur under-arm bowler who -made a mark in first-class cricket. His performance against Cambridge -in the now famous University match is too well known to need record -here. Humphreys of Sussex has only retired two or three seasons, and -for a long time he got a lot of wickets. His bowling has always been -useful to his county, but during the season of 1893 it has met with -extraordinary success. He has great command over the ball and can -consequently vary its flight, pitch and break at will. Humphreys will -always be a terror to those batsmen who prefer to hit the ball in the -air rather than along the ground, and to those who recklessly leave -their ground and hit wildly at the pitch of the ball. J. B. Wood of -Oxford has occasionally got wickets for his University with lobs, -and helped materially to win the match _v._ Cambridge in 1892; but -he, though useful as a change, is a long way removed from a good lob -bowler, and, indeed, his best ball would seem to be a straight high -full pitch. Although we have stated that lob bowling has died a natural -death, and cannot ever be expected to cope with the present state of -batting, still under-hand slows are occasionally such an excellent -change that we are sorry they are not more practised. It is not, -however, wonderful that there are so few lob bowlers who can go on at a -pinch for a change, when we consider what has been already said about -batting having mastered the art of under-hand; men will not practise -any art unless they have some fair prospect of being ultimately -successful, and knowing that lobs will only be useful very occasionally -and cannot attain to great success, they will not practise them. It is -a pity they do not, as over and over again we see instances of a good -wicket falling to a poorish lob bowler when everything else has failed. -The previous remarks about under-hands refer to first-class cricket; -against schools and against second-class batsmen lobs have been and -always will be particularly deadly. There is something so tempting to -an inexperienced player in seeing a ball chucked up in the air slowly -and simply, it looks so very easy to hit, so peculiarly guileless, that -a wild slog is frequently the result, too often followed by disastrous -consequences. - -For this reason the captain of every school eleven should insist on one -of his team devoting himself to lob bowling; a little practice will -enable any one to get a fairly accurate pitch, and twist from the leg -side any boy can manage. Lob bowling thus acquired at school will often -be useful in after days as a change, even in first-class cricket. There -are one or two simple rules connected with lob bowling which everyone -who attempts this style should master. - -First.--Do not bowl too slow; if the ball is thrown high and slow in -the air, a good batsman, quick on his legs, will have time to reach and -hit it before it pitches. Old Clarke used to say, ‘It wants a certain -amount of pace to make a good-length ball with proper rise and twist.’ -The ball should be sent at such speed as will oblige the batsman to -play forward to it. - -Secondly.--A good long run should be taken, as this gets way and ‘fire’ -on to the ball, and is always more likely than a short run to deceive -the batsman as to the pitch. - -Thirdly.--Generally bowl round the wicket. - -Most of the remarks that we have made on slow round-arm leg-break -bowling apply to slow lobs. - -Having devoted a number of pages to the subject of slow bowling, -let us now turn to the consideration of what is almost equally -important--fast bowling; indeed, it may be said that the co-operation -of a good fast bowler is absolutely essential if a team wants to rank -amongst the best, particularly as, if there be one of each sort bowling -at either end, the change in pace is more likely to embarrass the -batsman than if he had to play two bowlers of the same pace. Between -1872 and 1887 there was a great dearth of good fast bowlers, at the -time much regretted and not easily accounted for. Now there is a great -improvement, and fast bowling gets much more attention paid to it than -formerly was the case. - -Although ordinary fast balls are easy to play on good wickets, -however, it is but seldom that a wicket which is good at the beginning -of a match remains so to the close. The ground wears and cuts up with -the continual pitching of the ball and the tramp of feet, and fast -bowling on such occasions often becomes most deadly. Then, again, a -fast quick delivery to a newcomer, even though the best of batsmen, -may deceive him in the pace, and, before the eye gets accustomed to -the light and the hand becomes steady, cheat him into playing back -at a ball which ought to have been met with forward play. Often have -crack batsmen been dismissed summarily by the first or second ball -coming quicker than they expected off the pitch. Murdoch, the famous -Australian batsman, was particularly apt to mistime fast bowling on -first going in, and several times has the author seen his stumps -shattered immediately by an ordinary straight fast ball without any -‘work’ at all on it. The tail end of a team are usually victims to a -good straight fast bowler, as, unless a fast bowler is met by straight -fearless forward play, he is bound to be dangerous, and it very rarely -happens that the tail end of an ordinary team, even a county team, is -capable of this. A great deal has been said and written about young -fast bowlers bowling too fast for their strength, thus overtaxing their -powers and over-bowling themselves. It is doubtless a fact that many -young promising fast bowlers have been rendered useless by this anxiety -to get more pace on the ball than their strength warranted; and there -can be no better advice to a young aspirant for the honours of a fast -bowler than that so often given, viz. ‘Bowl within your strength, or -else you will over-bowl yourself.’ Although the wisdom and truth of -this warning are generally ascertained by personal experience pretty -early in the career of most fast bowlers, it is seldom, we are sorry -to say, remembered in actual practice--which remissness, we are bound -to add, does not in the least surprise us. It may possibly sound like -heresy to many old cricketers to say that in fast bowling pace is -nearly everything; but such is our opinion. Assume that a man can bowl -straight and a good length--i.e. has a good command over the ball--and -then it may be said that the faster he bowls the more likely he is to -get wickets. And this is generally discovered by young bowlers who have -an aptitude for fast bowling, with the result that many ‘over-bowl’ -themselves, strain muscles, rick shoulders, and render themselves -useless. - -The object of fast bowling is to beat the batsman by the pace of the -ball, and if this object be accomplished the ball will either be missed -or a bad stroke will be made by the batsman. The faster the bowling -the more likely it is that a batsman will be beaten both before and -after the ball leaves the ground. Should the ball ‘shoot’ or ‘get -up,’ the chances of its being played accurately are rendered much -less when the ball leaves the ground with lightning-like speed and is -almost invisible to the eye than when it leaves it with less speed, -and gives the batsman an opportunity of seeing what is going to happen -for an appreciable moment before it reaches him. Besides, the faster -the bowling the more scope there is for the bowler to change his pace -should he be one of the few fast bowlers who have the power of so doing -with advantage. While saying that pace is everything in a fast bowler, -we do not wish for a moment to cry down or disparage the advantages of -medium-paced bowling. This style has its own characteristics, which -are more closely allied to slow bowling than to fast; but at the same -time there are many moderately good medium-paced bowlers now bowling -with some success in first-class matches who would be much more deadly -and successful could they add about half as much speed again to their -bowling. There are, of course, men who, on the other hand, spoil a good -style by trying to bowl too fast--men who depend for their success -on peculiarity in flight and the work on the ball. Every man must -judge for himself; if he possess great powers of twist combined with -accuracy, and anything peculiar or difficult to see in his action, then -let him devote himself to slow or medium-paced bowling. - -When the first edition of this work was published, first-class cricket -was almost entirely without any really fast good bowling. Things have -changed since then, and the hope that we then expressed that a new -race of good fast bowlers would arise has been happily fulfilled. -Ten years ago the only really fast professional bowler was Ulyett of -Yorkshire. He was fast and bumpy, and occasionally most deadly with -his break-backs. Allan Hill of the same county, with his easy and -beautiful delivery, had retired owing to increasing years. There were -brilliant comets for a season or so who shone brightly and then quickly -disappeared. Harrison, likewise of Yorkshire, seemed likely to make -his mark, but after a brilliant beginning vanished from the scene of -first-class cricket. Crossland of Lancashire, for a brief period, -mowed down the County Palatine’s opponents like ninepins, but he too -retired--a victim to the just cry against unfair bowling. There was -Bowley of Surrey, a very fast and uncertain bowler, who was perhaps -the best fast bowler for a season or so, but it was a pitiful best for -English cricket to produce. Amongst the amateurs were A. Rotherham, S. -Christopherson, Whitby and C. Toppin. H. Rotherham, at the beginning -of his career, his last year at Uppingham and the year following, was -a very deadly bowler. He had a good slow ball and a splendid yorker; -but he only lasted a very short time. S. Christopherson was a fairly -good fast bowler at one time, but he took a good deal out of himself -with his action, and soon lost the fire and life that a fast bowler -must possess. The temporary absence of good fast bowlers during some of -the years between 1880 and 1888 was one of the most remarkable facts -connected with first-class cricket. It was the more remarkable because -it was only a few years before this that nearly all the great bowlers -were fast: the list included Tarrant, Jackson, and Freeman, whose -bowling used, it was said, to hum in the air; and after these what a -harvest of fast amateur bowlers there was--Butler, Francis, Powys, -Evans, Morton, and names too numerous to mention. - -Now, we are happy to say, English cricket can once more be proud of -her array of fast bowlers. Richardson of Surrey, the greatest in our -judgment that ever lived, Mold and Cuttell of Lancashire, Hearne and -Davidson are all good fast bowlers. Among amateurs, S. M. J. Woods -was the best, but for the last few seasons he has been handicapped by -a sprain, but when at his best he was a magnificent fast bowler with -a most deceptive slow ball; while Jackson, Kortright, Jessop, and -Cunliffe are all far above the average. - -As mentioned above, with reference to slow bowling, the higher the hand -and arm are raised at the moment of delivering the ball, the higher the -ball will bound after it leaves the pitch. A fast bowler should always -bear this in mind, and keep his hand as high as possible. It is simply -a matter of ordinary common sense that a ball which rises up high from -the pitch is more difficult for a batsman to get over and smother than -one that comes on low and skimming. A fast ball, when it is anything -like a good length, must be met with the bat, i.e. it must be played -with the forward stroke; consequently a ball that rises quickly from -the pitch, and is still rising when it meets the bat, is extremely -likely to rise higher still after it leaves it, unless it is played -with great care and caution. - -The low skimming fast bowler is generally an easy man to play; the -batsman, when the ground is true, can play hard forward to almost any -length of ball; there is no abrupt rise to render an uppish stroke -probable, even if he does slightly misjudge the pace and length of the -ball. There is, of course, in fast bowling, a much greater difficulty -in getting any appreciable twist on to the ball than in slow. The ball -leaves the ground so quickly that it is hardly in contact with it -long enough to ‘bite’ the turf, and so avail itself of any spin that -may have been imparted to it by the bowler. It is to be remembered, -however, that the slightest deviation of a fast ball from its course -after it has pitched is, if a good length, most likely to deceive the -batsman. The latter is bound to play to the pitch of the ball, as it -leaves the ground so quickly as to render it impossible for him to -follow it with the eye in its course from the ground. He plays forward -with a straight bat to meet it; should it turn an inch or two he will -most likely miss it. - -The off break is the one most usually attempted by fast bowlers; the -ball is grasped firmly, generally by the seam, to give the hand a -firmer grip, and is delivered in the same way as described for the slow -off break. There have been but few really fast bowlers who have been -able consistently to make their balls come ‘back.’ Every now and then, -however, for some unaccountable reason, a fast bowler finds that he is -making the ball do a lot from the off side. Perhaps his grasp is firmer -and his wrist and fingers are more powerful than on ordinary occasions, -or the ground may have more turf on it, or, for some other reason, his -bowling twists in from the pitch with most fatal results to the batsmen. - -If a fast bowler happen to be a man of strong physique, which is -usually the case, a fairly long run up to the wickets before delivering -the ball is an advantage to his bowling. This gives more impetus to the -ball, and what is popularly known as ‘devil.’ Spofforth, the Australian -bowler, when bowling fast, took a much longer run than when bowling -medium pace. It is also an advantage to keep the batsman waiting for -the delivery of the ball, which happens when the bowler runs several -yards up to the wicket. For a fast bowler who intends to change his -pace from very fast to medium slow, a long run is of great advantage, -as the sight of the bowler coming up to the wicket before the delivery -of a slow ball as fast as before the delivery of a fast one, is -extremely likely to take in the batsman with regard to the pace. There -are not so many tricks and dodges in the art of bowling fast as there -are in bowling slow; the chief object to be sought is to bowl straight -and good length, and to make the ball bound. A fast bowler, when first -being put on, should remember that his muscles are probably stiff, and -that he may not at first be able to bowl as accurately and as fast -as he will be when thoroughly warmed to his work. For this reason it -is always well to bowl two or three balls to one side of the wicket -before beginning. These should be not quite at full speed, for fear of -straining or ricking a muscle not yet in full swing, but a good medium -pace. It is always best for a fast bowler to try a ball or two before -beginning, excepting in circumstances when he is called upon to bowl to -some one he has never bowled to before, and especially so to some one -who has never seen him bowl. How often when batting have we silently -chuckled with joy at seeing a man quite unknown to us rapidly loosening -his arms with two or three balls before beginning to bowl! It is a -great thing to have an unknown bowler on one’s side, but he loses half -his value if his style and action are revealed to the batsman before he -receives the ball. In 1886 the writer was playing in a match against -the Australians, when, although things had been going very well for the -English side, the team was beginning to get tied up into a knot owing -to the steady careful way in which Scott, the colonial captain, was -defying all the efforts of our bowlers to dislodge him. A fast bowler, -who had never seen Scott in his life before, was deputed to bowl, and -was proceeding to get ready for ‘two or three down’ to loosen his arm, -when he was told not to mind his arm being stiff, but to bowl the first -over as fast as ever he could. The first ball sent Scott’s leg-stump -flying; it was quite a simple ball, never turned a hair’s breadth -either way, but the action and pace of the bowler took him in, and this -would have been very unlikely to happen had he had an opportunity of -seeing the bowler’s style. - -A fast bowler must be straight to be good. This is not the art of one -skilled in the dodges of slows; he has to bowl straight, and a good -length too, or else the runs will come at an enormous rate. In the -present day it is usual to do without a long-stop even to the fastest -bowlers; this makes it imperatively necessary for the bowler not to -bowl to leg, or, if missed by the batsman, the balls have a good chance -of flying past the wicket-keeper to the boundary for four. Whether -it is a good principle to do without long-stops, even when the best -wicket-keepers are behind the sticks, is a doubtful point. - -A fast bowler should have such command over the ball as to be able to -bowl a ‘yorker’ whenever he wishes, for the fact may be repeated that a -fast ‘yorker’ is a most deadly ball. - -Spofforth and Palmer, the Australians, and Rotherham, the old -Uppingham bowler, Woods, and Mold were about the best fast ‘yorker’ -bowlers of modern times. The ball came from these bowlers as high -as the arm would allow, and seemed to fly like an arrow, with -lightning-like rapidity, straight to the block-hole, or a few inches -inside it. A high-action ‘yorker’ is more likely to deceive a batsman -than a low-action one, as in the former case the starting-point of the -ball is above the line of vision, and in the latter on a line with -or below it, which naturally makes the course and pace of the ball -more easy for the eye to judge. A very common error into which good -fast ‘yorker’ bowlers fall is not being content with trying the ball -occasionally to a batsman, and when he first comes on or when they -first go on, but persistently trying, over after over, to break down -his guard with a ball with which he is evidently quite at home, and -which presents no terrors to him. The result of this mistake is that -the balls get considerably punished, either by being driven on the -full-pitch or else on the half-volley, the latter ball being often -the result of a tired-out ‘yorker’ bowler’s persistency. The writer -remembers, when playing in a match some years ago, asking W. G. Grace, -who was on the same side, what sort of a fast bowler a certain man -was who was going on to bowl. ‘Oh, I’m never frightened of him; he is -always trying to “york” you, and bowls any amount of half-volleys,’ was -the reply, and this was soon proved to be, like most of the champion -cricketer’s opinions, perfectly accurate. - -A good length just outside the off stump and between the off and middle -stump is the direction that may be commended to the bowler who bowls -over the wicket, and tries to get a little off spin on the ball. The -leg-stump, in olden days, was considered the most deadly spot for a -fast bowler to aim at; but since every first-class batsman now stands -up to his wicket, and does not draw away an inch when the ball comes -between it and his legs, leg-stump bowling is rather expensive work. -By all means let fast bowlers lay siege to the leg-stump of inferior -batsmen; but good batsmen, getting over this ball, will play it with -an almost perfectly straight bat on the outside, and tax it most -unmercifully for the total of their side. - -As a rule, it is better for a fast bowler to bowl over the wicket, -as by so doing he has more of the wicket to bowl at, and has, -consequently, a slightly better chance of hitting it if the ball is -missed by the batsman. He has also a greater chance of an appeal for -leg before wicket being answered in his favour than if bowling from -the other side of the wicket. There are some fast bowlers, however, -who must, from the very nature of their action and delivery, bowl from -round the wicket, viz. those who have either a natural bias from the on -to the off, or who are able by their strength of wrist and fingers to -impart such a bias to the ball. A man who bowls from the very extent -of the crease outside the wicket, and whose bowling has naturally or -otherwise this leg side bias--it can hardly be called twist in fast -bowling--is a particularly awkward customer for the batsman. There is -such a constant tendency and inclination for the ball to keep going -farther away to the off side, both before and after its pitch, that -the greatest care must be exercised by the batsman to prevent himself -playing inside the ball and putting it up either to point, third man, -or short-slip. A fast ball that comes in from the leg side is the most -difficult ball that has to be played, assuming its good length. There -have been very few--too few--fast right-handed bowlers who have been -able to manage this ball, but there are many instances of left-handed -men who have attained to great accuracy with it. The late Fred Morley, -of Nottingham, and Emmett, of Yorkshire, are instances. - -About thirty years ago there were numerous good fast bowlers, who used -to get the leg bias on the ball in the following way: They bowled round -the wicket, and delivered the ball from about the height of the hip; -the backs of the fingers were presented to the batsman before and at -the moment of delivery; the result being that the ball had on it a -slight amount of what, in slow bowling, we have described as leg-break. -This was a useful style, and it is a pity that it has almost altogether -died out at the present day. - -It is quite impossible to say with any certainty what essentials are -necessary in fast bowling before it can be ranked as first-class; so -very much depends on whether the action is easy or difficult for the -batsman to see. By the word ‘see’ is meant whether the pace and pitch -of the ball at the moment of delivery can be instantly gauged by the -batsman or not. Given equal straightness, pace, and command over the -ball in every respect, the bowler who has an action which it is easy -to see cannot compare with the man who, from some peculiarity in the -movements of his body at the moment of delivery, has an action which -is not easy to see. Now, it is a very difficult task to lay down any -rules or reasons why some bowlers are easier to see than others; but -after a good deal of consideration on this subject the writer has come -to the conclusion that the bowlers who do _not_ present a square front -to the batsman when the ball is delivered, but who stand sideways or -half turned, are, as a rule, the most difficult to judge. The hand -comes then from behind the body, and is often not plainly seen till -the very latest moment before delivery. There may be, and no doubt -are, many mannerisms in bowlers which have their effect, but the above -suggestion will probably be found to contain a good sound working rule. -Take Giffen, the Australian; almost as much of his back as his front -was visible to the batsman when he delivered the ball, and his bowling -was most difficult to see--at any rate until the batsman was thoroughly -well set. Perhaps the best English batsmen have made more bad and -utterly mistimed strokes off Giffen than off any other modern bowler. -Spofforth may have bowled more men out, but Giffen certainly was the -cause of more misjudged and uppish strokes, due, in all probability, to -the fact of his bowling being so difficult to see. - -[Illustration: Low delivery.] - -The best bit of bowling the writer ever recollects playing against was -in the second innings of the Gentlemen of England _v._ Australians, at -Lord’s in 1884. It was Giffen’s day, and a batsman had to have luck -on his side if he succeeded in staying in long enough to appreciate -the beauty of the bowling. Take Peate and Emmett, the two Yorkshire -left-handers, both in their day the best bowlers in England--both these -men stand sideways to the batsman when they deliver the ball, and both -are most difficult to see. Palmer, the Australian, bowled very nearly -quite square; his bowling was very easy to see and to judge, and the -more credit is therefore due to him for being such a successful bowler. -There is no doubt a greater difficulty in attaining to perfect length -and command over the ball when the body of the bowler is not square at -the moment of delivery; but if these essentials to good bowling are -obtained by patience and constant practice, the bowler has this great -advantage, that his balls are more difficult for the batsman to judge -accurately. It seems strange that not one of the numerous published -books on cricket has ever suggested the advantage to the bowler which -is obtained in this way. In almost every one of these works great -stress is laid upon the necessity of the bowler presenting a full face -to the opposite wicket at the moment the ball leaves the hand. It is -doubtless easier for a beginner to bowl _straight_ if he adopts this -style of bowling; but if he can once gain straightness by the other, -viz. the sideways style, he has enlisted a great help to success. - -W. G. Grace is, however, an exception to this rule. He delivers the -ball perfectly square with the batsman; and yet we suppose that to -a batsman who meets him for the first time, his bowling is about as -difficult to see and to judge as that of any bowler ever was. It is a -fact that his bowling is invariably fatal to men he has not met before. -This is owing to the hovering flight that his action imparts to the -ball. The first time the writer ever played against W. G. Grace’s -bowling was at Cambridge in 1878, and on the way to the wickets he -was greeted with the cheering cry, ‘I’ll get you out; I always get -youngsters out!’ and surely enough he did, caught and bowled for two or -thereabouts. What the champion did next morning showed that he was as -generous and kind to young cricketers as he was skilful in the game. He -took the writer to the nets prior to the beginning of the second day’s -play, and saying that youngsters required to know his bowling before -being at home with it, he proceeded to bowl for quite twenty minutes -to him; a comprehension of his method was thus gained, and the result -was an addition to the Cambridge score of some forty odd in the second -innings. Few latter-day cricketers would do this. - -Perhaps one of the reasons why W. G. Grace is so deadly to young -cricketers is this: the batsman, seeing an enormous man rushing up -to the wickets, with both elbows out, great black beard blowing on -each side of him, and a huge yellow cap on the top of a dark swarthy -face, expects something more than the gentle lobbed-up ball that does -come; he cannot believe that this baby-looking bowling is really the -great man’s, and gets flustered and loses his wicket. W. G. Grace is -certainly enormous, and a year or two ago at Lord’s an amusing remark -might have been overheard on this subject. The England _v._ Australia -match was being played. W. G. walked out into the field side by side -with Briggs of Lancashire, the latter, as is well known, being very -small, perhaps hardly up to W. G.’s elbow. A small child of about five -was in the pavilion with his father, and said, ‘Father, who is that big -man?’ ‘That’s Dr. Grace, the champion,’ said the papa; and ‘Who is the -little one?’ the child continued. ‘That is Briggs.’ Dead silence for a -few moments, and then, ‘Papa, is Briggs Dr. Grace’s baby?’ - -Although power of pace, straightness, and command over the ball are -the really essential qualities of good fast bowling--as, indeed, of -all sorts--there are many occasions when fortune smiles upon bowling -which possesses none of these good attributes. And it is for this -reason, we think, that every cricketer should be able to bowl when -called upon to do so by his captain. Every man who has played cricket -has bowled at a net, and he certainly has an action which is different -from everybody else’s. As a rule, men who are not considered regular -bowlers can send the ball in somehow or other at a fairly fast pace -more or less straight, and these unknown, wild, and erratic bowlers -often succeed in getting rid of well-set batsmen who have defied all -the efforts of the recognised bowlers of the side. There are numerous -instances of a side being deeply indebted to a bowler who never -before nor afterwards showed the slightest ability to get wickets. -In Australia in 1882, when Ivo Bligh’s English team was playing -combined Australia, on a certain occasion two of the best Australian -batsmen--Murdoch and Bannerman--seemed immovable. They had been in -for about an hour, and every one of the regular English bowlers had -been on and off. A suggestion was made to try C. F. H. Leslie. Now -this gentleman, with all his great merits, was never, even in the -estimation of his best friends, a great bowler. But on he went with -pleasure, as every cricketer should when ordered. The first ball was a -very fast one, rather wide, the second ditto, but the third one--‘Ah, -the third!’--was a head ball, designed after the manner of Spofforth’s -best; and it pitched on the middle of Murdoch’s middle stump! The next -comer was Horan, at that time the reputed best player of fast bowling -in the Colonies. A very fast long-hop, wide on the off side, was -prettily cut straight into Barlow’s hands at third man, and Mr. Leslie -had secured two wickets for no runs. He continued for another over or -two, had Bannerman beautifully stumped by Mr. Tylecote off a fast wide -half-volley on the leg side, and then retired in favour of one of the -regular bowlers, after having, simply by wild erratic fast delivery, -lowered three of the best Australian wickets. We give this as an -example of the principle that every cricketer should try to bowl, and -if he finds that he cannot attain to any efficiency, even with constant -practice, then let him try to ‘sling in’ as hard as ever he possibly -can; he will often be of use to his side when in a fix. - -Before leaving the subject of fast bowling a word must be said about -what--some years ago, and again now--may be called the great cricket -bugbear of the last few years--viz. throwing. It is worthy of notice -that when over-arm bowling was first allowed a great outcry arose, -and there were not wanting those who prophesied that this ‘hand over -head’ style would ultimately result in ‘a mere over-hand throw--a kind -of pelting, with a little mannerism or flourish to disguise it.’ Now -it is an astonishing thing that, in a great variety of cases, this is -just what actually has happened. Some of the bowling that has been -allowed to pass unnoticed by umpires is well described by the phrase -quoted; but, although this is so, there are many minor offenders whom -all would like to see pulled up short, not out of any ill-will to them -personally, but in the interests of the game. Now throwing is most -pernicious to cricket, and is calculated, if allowed to increase (as it -surely will unless promptly suppressed by the authorities, backed by -public opinion), to exercise a most disastrous effect on the game. The -subject of throwing is sometimes pooh-poohed by prominent cricketers, -who have remarked, ‘What does it matter whether a man bowls or throws?’ -If it makes no difference, by all means let the M.C.C. at once expunge -the rule relating to throwing and jerking. But let us pause for a -moment to see if there are any reasons to suppose that it does make a -difference. There are, in truth, two very good reasons why throwing -should be stopped. First, if it were allowed it would seriously -interfere with the art of bowling. The reasons for this proposition are -as follows: In throwing there is no scope for dissimilarity of style. -All men who throw must, from the very nature of the delivery, send the -ball on its course with exactly the same description of spin. It is -impossible for a thrower to make the ball go across the wicket from -the leg to the on side; every ball which leaves a thrower’s hand has -the off-side spin on it, and none other is possible. Any style which -tends to cramp bowling, as this does, must be bad. Again, a throwing -bowler cannot change his pace as other bowlers do; he dare not bowl the -slow high-dropping ball so successfully used by Spofforth and others, -because he knows that when his arm and wrist move slowly the unfair -jerk of the wrist and elbow will be more manifest than when it is -partially concealed by the usual quick movement of his arm. If throwing -tends to cramp bowling, as it does, and render certain essentials for -the development of the science impossible, then it must be injurious -to the game. Secondly, if throwing were allowed the batsman would -be in a position of considerable danger. Many cricketers say, ‘Let -throwers alone, they are always easy to play;’ and this, no doubt, is -so, for the reasons given above, especially when every thrower must, -for the sake of appearances, adopt some slight measure of disguise in -his action; but once let it be recognised that throwing is part of the -game, and a race of sturdy chuckers will spring up, whose pace will be -so terrific that the best and pluckiest batsman will not be able to -defend his body, much less his wicket, against their lightning-like -deliveries. Imagine what it would be if Bonnor, or Forbes, or Game -were to be allowed to throw, all of them having thrown in their best -days as much as 120 yards--is it likely that a batsman at a distance -of only twenty-one yards could be quick enough with his bat to stop -such bowling? Even with an ordinary fast bowler a batsman has sometimes -difficulty in preventing himself from being struck by the ball, and -with an undisguised thrower the danger would be tenfold. - -The question then arises, what can be done to stop the throwing -nuisance? And it is one which every member of the cricket-loving -community should ask himself. It is a question of the greatest -difficulty, as is evident from the fact that the committee of the -M.C.C. have so far found it impossible to legislate with regard to -the nuisance. The committee has done everything in its power; it -has instructed the umpires to watch closely the delivery of every -doubtful bowler, and probably the umpires have acted fully up to their -instructions; but they have stopped here, and absolutely refused to -report to the world the result of their careful observations. It is a -fact that of late years no professional umpire in a first-class match -has no-balled a professional bowler for throwing. This is not to be -wondered at: professional umpires themselves have been professional -bowlers, and they cannot bring themselves to take the bread out of the -mouth of one of their own class by no-balling him, and stigmatising him -at once and for ever as a ‘thrower.’ - -We cannot get amateur umpires to stand: these would, no doubt, -fearlessly no-ball any unfair bowler; but if we could, we should -probably find that the quantity of bad decisions in the course of -the year would be greatly increased. An umpire wants practice and -experience in keeping his attention and whole mind fixed impartially on -the game, and this can only be acquired by those who stand day after -day in that capacity. - -The only way, then, to our mind, to stop throwing, as the M.C.C. -cannot and the umpires will not, is to get public opinion to step in -and sweep it off our cricket grounds. Let every amateur cricketer, -whether he plays for his county or his village club, set his face -resolutely against the evil, and do his utmost to discourage it. If an -‘Anti-Throwing Society’ could be established amongst cricketers, we -firmly believe it would effect its object. - -In the North of England, where the game is ever increasingly popular, -there are many ‘chuckers’ to be met with. The clubs who do not possess, -to say the least, a doubtful bowler are, we should say from our -experience, in the minority. Young professional bowlers see the general -laxity that prevails, and adopt the peculiar flick of the wrist and -elbow, hoping thereby to get more twist on the ball, and this sooner -or later develops into a throw. Young bowlers of this description get -drafted from their village clubs into the county team, and thereby -augment the number of ‘doubtful’ bowlers in first-class matches. Now if -every amateur stood out against this system, and even went so far as to -say, ‘I will not be one of a team that wins its matches by such means,’ -unfair bowling would soon die out. - -It may be accepted as an absolute truth that the greatest bowlers -do not throw, and never have. Spofforth, Turner, Palmer, Lohmann, -Richardson, Morley, and a host of others are true bowlers, and to the -credit of the Australians it may be said that till 1896, when Jones and -McKibbin came over, there had been no suspicion against any Colonial -bowler, and it is a matter of great regret that both Jones and McKibbin -must be described as very great offenders in the matter of throwing. - -[Illustration: Doubtful delivery.] - -It will be well for everyone to realise that, if this question is -allowed to drift on from year to year without any serious protest from -public opinion, it will become absolutely necessary for the committee -of the M.C.C. to do something in the matter. What this should be is, as -we have said, very doubtful, and many and varied would be the opinions -of competent judges as to the form of legislation that would meet -the evil. It can almost be taken for granted that it is impossible -satisfactorily to define a throw, and even if this were not so the -solution of the question would be no nearer, as there would be just the -same difficulties in the way of an umpire saying that a bowler came -within the definition as there is now in saying that he throws. What -is wanted is to get rid of throwers in small club and village matches, -and then we should never get them drafted into first-class cricket. If -the umpire at either end were allowed to no-ball, we believe the system -of throwing would receive a serious blow. It often happens that the -thrower can only bowl at his own umpire’s end; if he attempted it at -the other end he knows what would await him; and if both umpires had -the right to no-ball _for throwing_, this difficulty would be overcome -by his not being able to bowl at either end. It is, however, earnestly -to be hoped that no change of any sort in the rules will be necessary, -but that all true cricketers will unite in discountenancing that which -is always a source of wrangling and dispute. - -Before leaving the subject of fast bowling a few remarks on the -position of the field will not be out of place. Every bowler who is -worth his salt knows much better than anyone else how the field should -be placed to his bowling. So much depends upon the style and favourite -strokes of the batsman to be dislodged and the mode of attack that is -going to be brought into requisition, that the general rules we suggest -here are more as a guide to young fast bowlers than to those who have -gained their experience. To a fast over the wicket round-arm bowler (on -a true wicket) the field should be placed as on page 176. - - ● ● - COVER SLIP LONG SLIP - - SHORT SLIP - ● - 3ᴰ MAN - ● - ● - WICKET KEEPER - - ╔╦╗ - ● ║║║ - POINT ¯¯¯¯¯ - - - - ● - COVER POINT - ● - MID ON - - - - ● ╔╦╗ - MID OFF ║║║ - ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ - ● - BOWLER - - - - - - ● - LONG FIELD - - The field for a fast right-arm bowler. - -Should the bowler, however, be one who changes his pace to slow and -relies occasionally on quite a slow head ball, it will be as well to -bring short-leg half-way between the umpire and the bowler, and put -mid-on out deep in the field on the on side. On no occasion should -short-slip be dispensed with; he should on a fast wicket be fairly -fine, and if he is a quick active man with his hands (as he should -be for this post), about eight yards from the wicket. The object of -short-slip is to pick up snicks which just miss the wicket-keeper, and -although he may hold a larger proportion of these quick snap catches -when a long way from the wicket, he will get an infinitely greater -number when closer in; consequently, if he is a man of quick sight and -tenacious hand, he will actually secure more catches close in, although -at the same time he may miss more. The positions of long-leg, third -man, short-leg, and mid-on depend to a great extent on the batsman’s -play. It is a golden rule never to do without a point and cover-point, -although in some instances--e.g. when a strong cutting batsman is in -on a fast wicket--it is sometimes advisable to place point in front -of the wicket and cover-point square. It is, however, but seldom that -this is necessary, and many cricketers always view the change with some -misgiving as to its correctness, because a good active cover-point in -the usual place saves a large number of runs and, probably, gets more -catches than any other man in the field, with the exception of the -wicket-keeper and short-slip. - -A round the wicket fast bowler requires the field in much the same -position. But in his case it is sometimes necessary to have an extra -man on the leg side, as these bowlers are very apt to bowl between -the legs and the wicket, which means with good batsmen that they get -played on to the leg side, between mid-on and short-leg. If this change -is necessary long-leg may be sent almost to the boundary, very fine, -behind the wicket, and long-stop be brought on to the leg side. A very -fine long-leg prevents boundary byes, and generally manages to save the -fine long-leg boundary hits. Unless there is a first-class man behind -the stumps, however, this generally results with first-class bowling -in rather too many extras to justify its continuance. Fast left-hand -bowlers want more men on the off side, as, from the nature of their -bowling, they get more punished in that direction than anywhere else. -If fast left-hand bowling is accurate and straight, long-leg is usually -dispensed with, and, in fact, mid-on as well is often taken to the -other side of the wicket, leaving short-leg, who is brought forward a -few yards, the only man on the leg side of the wicket. Then there is an -unbroken line of fielders on the off side, which the batsman finds it -difficult to break through if it is composed of active and energetic -men. The way in which fast left-handed bowlers place their field is -usually as on page 177. - - ● - LONG SLIP - - ● - EXTRA SHORT SLIP ● SHORT SLIP - - ● - 3ᴰ MAN - ● - WICKET KEEPER - ╔╦╗ - ● ║║║ - POINT ¯¯¯¯¯ - - - ● - COVER POINT - ● - MID ON - - - ● - EXTRA COVER POINT - - - ╔╦╗ - MID OFF ● ║║║ - ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ - ● - BOWLER - - The field for a fast left-arm bowler. - -There is a class of fast left-hand bowlers who require more men on the -on side--viz. those who give the ball the leg side bias on delivery, -which, to a right-handed batsman, causes the ball to come in from -the off side, or, as it is usually termed, to come with the arm. It -is often necessary with this style of bowling to have a very fine -short-leg, to stop the snicks and leg byes which are caused by the -batsman playing outside the ball. Then a short-leg by the umpire is -necessary, and also a mid-on, making three on the on side. Mr. Appleby, -of Lancashire, is an example of this style of bowler, as is Wright of -Kent, who at times is most deadly with the ball coming with the arm, -especially if he has any assistance from the lie of the ground. We have -occasionally seen a left-arm bowler, like Emmett of Yorkshire--who -relies exclusively on the off break, which, to a right-handed batsman, -brings the ball from leg to off--involuntarily send down a ball that, -instead of taking the bias imparted to it, for some strange and -unaccountable reason went the other way, an accident which places the -batsman in a most awkward fix. - -Some bowlers experience great difficulty in bowling to left-handed -batsmen. The necessary alteration in their style seems to worry them -and interfere with their accuracy of pitch. Usually a slow bowler tries -to get a left-handed batsman caught on the off side. He places most of -his men on this side, and bowls the off break (or, as it would be to -a left-handed batsman, the leg-break) with the object of getting the -batsman to play inside the ball, and thus make an upstroke. In short, -he places the men as a left-handed bowler places them when bowling to -a right-handed batsman. Left-handed batsmen are notoriously strong and -powerful in their off hitting, and consequently in this direction must -the bait be laid. As a rule, left-handed batsmen are apt to be a trifle -wild and unable to restrain their keenness to hit, and consequently -they pay the usual penalty of attempting to hit widish off balls -going away from them. But occasionally a bowler meets a left-hander -who is too wide awake and too good a batsman thus to throw away his -chance of scoring, and then different tactics must be employed. There -have been, and are, wonderfully few really good left-handed batsmen -in England, and the chance of a bowler having to meet one of them is -very slight. Between the years 1880 and 1890 there were only, in first -class cricket, the late W. Scotton of Notts and Peel of Yorkshire and -the late F. M. Lucas. The best of this class was perhaps F. M. Lucas, -whose early death in India will always be deeply regretted by his wide -circle of friends. He was really an accomplished batsman with good -sound defence and great punishing powers. A slow bowler might bowl for -hours on the off side to him with the sole result of seeing four after -four being despatched all along the ground to the boundary. Moses of -Sydney has many times distinguished himself against our English teams -in Australia, and was an excellent batsman. At the present time we -have Ford, Clement Hill and Darling the Australians, and the two last -are probably the two finest left-handed batsmen the world has seen. -Ford as a hitter was perhaps the hardest left-hander that ever lived, -and Hewett a few years ago was almost as hard. Bruce the Australian -is a fine free left-handed batsman, and certainly has a more graceful -and finished style than any other left-hander we have yet seen. In -our opinion, when a really good left-hander comes in, one who is not -likely to get himself out on the off side by careless hitting, an -attack should be made on his leg-stump. Most left-handers are good -leg-hitters, but we have never yet seen one (not excepting those above -named) who was as good on the leg-stump as a first-class right-handed -batsman. There is an awkwardness apparent in the left-hander’s play -to a ball pitching on the leg-stump, or just inside it, and there is -always a great likelihood of a cross bat being used for a leg hit. -Many and many a time has the writer, after trying the off-ball trick -unsuccessfully against one of these batsmen, succeeded in dismissing -him by bowling over the wicket at the leg-stump and between the legs -and leg-stump of the batsman. This manœuvre only entails a couple of -men being brought across from the off side to stop the run-getting. - -There is one species of ball which we have not discussed, deadly as it -is, both in fast and slow bowling. This is the ball which, after the -pitch, never rises, but shoots along the surface of the ground, and -is commonly called a ‘shooter.’ The reason why no notice was taken of -this when the different kinds of ball which may be bowled were being -dealt with is because no amount of practice or skill can enable a -bowler to bowl thus. It depends for existence upon inequalities in the -ground. There are some grounds which have acquired great reputation for -supplying ‘shooters’ for the benefit of bowlers; but this reputation is -unfortunately always accompanied by one for being lumpy and dangerous. -Not a great many years ago Lord’s used to be celebrated for shooters, -owing to its rough condition; and even now, well looked after as it is, -shooters are of more frequent occurrence there than on most other good -grounds. Although it is not in the power of any man to bowl shooters -at will, still there is no doubt that men with a low delivery have a -greater chance of being helped by a shooter than men who bowl with a -high overhead action. The writer recollects at Cambridge, about 1879 -or 1880, being told by a young professional bowler, engaged at the -University ground at that time, that he had found out how to bowl -shooters. He was a bowler of considerable promise, and had begun to -make his mark in county cricket, but it being known that his cricket -abilities far exceeded his intellectual powers, the announcement of -this wonderful discovery was received with some amount of doubt. -However, out he came to bowl, to prove his prowess with the celebrated -shooter; but it simply appeared that, instead of bowling with an -overhead delivery, which was his wont, he bent his body quite low, and -proceeded to bowl in a manner which was hardly removed from genuine -under-hand. It is unnecessary to say that there were no shooters. His -balls kept low after the pitch because his action was low. - -There is one style of bowling sometimes seen in the present day that -has not been mentioned, viz. fast under-arm. This is of two kinds: -first, that which pitches a good length as with round-arm bowling; -secondly, ‘sneaks,’ or bowling that pitches near the bowler’s hand and -travels along the ground till the ball reaches the batsman. The latter -can never be of any avail against a good player on a decent wicket, as -every ball can be met by the forward stroke and rendered harmless. In -country matches it is amusing to see the batsmen holding their bats -in the air and trying to pounce down at the very last moment on these -balls. This mode of playing such bowling is essentially incorrect, and -would even be likely to cause the downfall of a good batsman; it is as -certain as anything can be at cricket that a good forward straight bat -cannot miss a ‘sneak.’ Mr. C. I. Thornton at one time attempted this -style of bowling, and was known to get a wicket or two. The good-length -fast under-arm, when bowled round the wicket with a good leg twist on, -might be made very dangerous. The old style of low round-arm, mentioned -a few pages back, was very similar to this style of bowling, and was -bowled with the same object as this has in view, viz. catches in the -slips and on the off side. We only know of one fast under-arm, leg -twist, good-length bowler, and he does not play in first-class cricket. -His name is Bunch, an old sergeant of the Black Watch, well known on -many military cricket-grounds all over England and India. Some years -ago he was decidedly a good bowler, his balls came very fast, pitched -good length on the leg-stump, and, having lots of leg stuff on, wanted -very careful play. - -And now, after having discussed the different styles of bowling known -in cricket, let us consider some of the main rules which must guide -the action of every bowler in the field. The first and chief principle -that a young bowler must master is that he is bowling for his side’s -success, and not for his own; and that, with that object in view, he -has voluntarily placed himself under the leadership of his captain. -He must, therefore, give in at once, and readily, to every order. A -captain is always ready to hear the suggestions of a bowler, and, as -a rule, with regard to placing the field, is always willing to adopt -them; but should he not do so, the bowler must accept the decision -with the best grace possible. There is nothing more discouraging and -demoralising to a side than a sulky bowler--i.e. one who gets angry -when spoken to, and subsequently adopts a defiant manner towards his -captain. This bowler is usually a very poor stamp of sportsman, but -unfortunately he may often be seen, and the marks by which he may be -recognised are: First, bowling wildly and much faster than usual. -Secondly, getting to his place at the end of his over after everyone -else. Thirdly, if he fields a ball, throwing at the wicket, instead -of to the wicket-keeper, as hard as he can, generally causing an -over-throw. Fourthly, if he misses a ball in the field, standing still -and allowing some more remote fielder to run after it, or else running -after it himself at about the same pace as if he were just starting on -a five-mile race. He is a great nuisance generally in the game. We do -not deny that circumstances often arise when one is bowling that tax to -the utmost the temper of the mildest man in the world; it is, to say -the least, very irritating to try for half an hour to get a man caught -out by a particular stroke off a particular ball, and then at the end -see the ball bowled, the stroke made, and the catch missed; but, as -chance enters to a great extent into the game, the bowler ought to do -his very utmost to curb his feelings, in the interests of others who -are taking part in the game. - -A bowler should be ready to take any place in the field when he is -not bowling. In these days, when slow bowling is frequently on at -both ends, there is often a difficulty in getting four men to do the -out-fielding. A bowler should not object at all to help his side by -doing this out-country work. Although a great specialist in the field, -such as an excellent cover-point or point, is always an object of -admiration, more admirable still are men good at all places. W. G. -Grace, A. N. Hornby, and many others we could mention were at one time -equally safe and at home in any position where they were placed. - -A bowler should never grumble aloud at catches being missed; the -unfortunate man has done his best and failed, and any censure only -makes him more flurried and adds to his discomfiture without doing any -good. - -A golden rule for every bowler to observe is--after the batsman has -played the ball, _get back to the wicket as quickly as possible_. -Neglect of this rule loses many a ‘run out.’ If a bowler does not -get back to his wicket, there is no one to take the ball and knock -the bails off should the batsmen run and the ball be returned to the -bowler’s end. When the ball is thrown up, the bowler should not take it -till it has just passed the wicket; he should then seize and sweep the -ball into the stumps in one and the same action. Should he stand behind -and take the ball before it reaches the wicket, there is great danger -of his disarranging the bails before he gets the ball in his hands. Of -course there are exceptions to this rule--e.g. when a ball is coming -very slowly up to the wicket from a feeble throw or because the ground -is sticky and dead; then the bowler must do his best anyhow to get the -ball into the stumps before the batsman reaches the crease. - -A bowler should never throw the ball at the wicket unless it is the -only possible chance of running the batsman out. There is always a -chance of the ball slipping out of his hand and missing its aim. - -A bowler should take plenty of time between each ball he delivers. If -he hurries he will get flurried and out of breath and bowl badly. - -It is a mistake for a bowler to appeal unless he has a good chance of -getting a favourable decision. Umpires are very peculiar individuals; -once let it enter their heads that a bowler is trying to ‘jockey’ a -decision out of them, up go their backs, and they suddenly become a -mechanical toy that glibly answers every appeal with the two words ‘Not -out,’ and those only. A bowler is quite justified in appealing for a -leg before wicket even if he is himself doubtful and uncertain as to -whether the ball pitched quite straight or would have quite hit the -wicket, since he is exceedingly likely not to form a correct impression -of its straightness from the fact of his being at the moment of the -pitch of the ball a little out of the straight line between the wickets. - -Bowlers should always take care before a match that they are shod with -good stout shoes with plenty of nails in them. It is a most important -thing for a bowler to have shoes which will prevent him from slipping, -and this is somewhat difficult when grounds are so constantly changing -from hard to soft. For a hard ground nothing is better than big nails -or screws; these do not go into the ground, but grip it and give a firm -foothold. The left shoe of a right-hand bowler and the right shoe of a -left-hand one should be extra well supplied with nails, because in the -act of bowling the whole weight of the body comes down upon the left -foot with the right-hand bowler and the right with a left-hand one. - -For a soft ground the old-fashioned spikes are the best. They can be -put in and taken out in a few minutes before the beginning of a match, -according to the state of the ground. Every bowler should carry spikes, -nails, and screws, a screw-driver and gimlet, in his cricket-bag. - -A bowler should do all in his power to prevent cutting up the wicket -with his feet in a place where bowling from the other end may pitch. If -he finds that he is doing so with either foot he should at once change -sides of the wicket, and if he then finds that, do what he will, he -cannot help damaging the wicket--which is a most unlikely event--he -should at once desist from bowling. If the ground is unduly cut up and -made artificially difficult for the batsman by bowlers’ feet, whether -it is done intentionally or not, such bowling is unfair and should at -once be stopped. Spofforth in some states of the ground used to spoil -it terribly, and this although he wore no spikes on the offending -foot. The side of this foot, however, came down with great force a few -yards in front of his own wicket. No doubt great damage at times was -caused to the opposing batsmen by this unfortunate foot, and also to -the Australian batsmen themselves, and on one occasion an appeal was -made to the umpire as to whether, though caused unintentionally, it was -or was not unfair. The umpire declined to give an opinion. But there -can be little doubt that a bowler who has unfortunately developed this -tendency is transgressing the rules of fair cricket. - -A chapter on bowling would not be complete without the addition of some -rules for the guidance of those who are beginning to play cricket and -who want to learn how to bowl. Success depends so much upon the natural -action of the bowler that the multiplicity of rules so often laid down -for the guidance of young bowlers, though followed out to the letter, -does not greatly profit the aspirant to bowling honours. There are many -straight accurate bowlers who can put as much twist as most men on the -ball, and who yet never attain to any eminence in the art. This is due -to their action being simple and easy to see, and to their consequent -inability to deceive the batsman as to the pace and flight of the ball. -There are, however, one or two simple elementary rules which it would -be always as well for young bowlers to follow. - -First.--Take every opportunity of bowling at imitation cricket with -a racquet or fives ball, or any other sort of ball. This teaches you -by practical experience the difference in the spins of the ball and -what constitutes a good ball. Small cricket with a fives ball and a -fives bat is splendid fun, and has initiated many a youngster into the -mysteries of break-backs and breaks from leg. - -Secondly.--Keep your arm as high as possible. - -Thirdly.--If naturally inclined to be a fast bowler, aim at -straightness first of all, and take care to bowl well within your -strength. - -Fourthly.--Always bowl in the same style and action. Bowl every day -in practice, but not for more than half an hour. And take a rest of a -minute or so after every six balls; remember in a match you have a rest -after every four or five. Bowl carefully in practice. If you get tired -leave off at once. If you find your bowling is getting worse instead of -better, leave off for a few days and have a complete rest. - -Fifthly.--Take a good long run, whether you bowl slow or fast; and if -you can, run on a little after delivering the ball. This gives extra -‘fire’ to the ball. - -Sixthly.--Be sure to practise bowling both sides of the wicket. - -Seventhly.--If you want to become a really good bowler accustom your -fingers early to get as much twist as possible on the ball, both ways. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -CAPTAINCY. - -(BY A. G. STEEL.) - - -[Illustration: Going in.] - -It is a strange fact connected with cricket that a good captain is -but seldom met with. The game has made such progress in popularity -during the last thirty years, and the numbers of those who are -proficient in its different branches have increased so enormously, that -we should certainly expect to find in our county and other important -matches captains who thoroughly understand the duties they are called -upon to fulfil. But on looking round we are disappointed to find that -the really good captains in first-class (including of course county) -cricket are extremely few, and these few are amateurs. The cause of -this may be that few men are able to take part in first-class cricket -after they have served such an apprenticeship as would give them the -experience, calmness, and judgment necessary for the difficult post of -captain; or it may be that the qualifications for a good leader in the -cricket-field are, from their very nature, seldom met with--in other -words, that a captain is born not made, and very seldom born, too. Few -professional cricketers (it is a well-known fact) make good captains; -we have hardly ever seen a match played, where a professional cricketer -was captain of either side, in which he was not guilty of some very -palpable blunders. Take the Gentlemen _v._ Players matches, at Lord’s -and the Oval, for the last twenty years; the Players have always been -seriously handicapped by the want of a good captain, though Shrewsbury -and Gunn may be exceptions. Bowlers are kept on maiden after maiden -without the faintest chance of a wicket, no originality of attack -is ever attempted, and altogether the captaincy is usually bad. It -must, however, be admitted that ‘professional’ captains are in a more -difficult position than amateurs, inasmuch as they are often exposed -to the but thinly concealed murmurings of their fellows, who consider -that they have not been treated with the amount of consideration they -deserve. Amateurs always have made, and always will make, the best -captains; and this is only natural. An educated mind, with a logical -power of reasoning, will always treat every subject better than one -comparatively untaught. There are exceptions to every rule, and Alfred -Shaw, the best professional captain we ever came across, is the -exception here. The disastrous effects of bad captaincy on the success -of a side were never more clearly manifested than by the Australian -team that visited England in 1878. This team contained several good -bowlers who, helped by the sticky state of the ground, were very deadly -to our best batsmen. Their batting was rough and rather untutored, -but still at times dangerous. They met with great success until the -grounds got hard and firm, when their bowlers were collared. It is in -adversity at cricket, as in the more serious walks of life, that the -best qualities come to the fore; and whenever the Australian bowlers -were collared, the whole team seemed to go to pieces. Either the -captain or the bowlers placed the fielders in the most extraordinary -and unheard-of positions, where they had but little chance of saving -runs or getting catches. Spofforth during one match at Lord’s in that -season bowled the greater part of the day to a batsman--the Hon. Edward -Lyttelton--who was not dismissed till he had topped his hundred. Ball -after ball was neatly cut on the hard true ground to the boundary, -past the spot where third man ought to have been but was not. Fancy a -fast bowler bowling on a hard ground, while a batsman made a hundred -without a third man; then think that this batsman was one of the -finest amateur cutters of his day, and you will wonder what had become -of the management of the side! This was, however, the first year the -Australians visited us; on many subsequent occasions we found out to -our cost that they had made good use of their time and experience in -England, and had improved, in every branch of the game, to what was to -an Englishman’s eye an alarming extent. Their captaincy, however, has -never been good, till Trott, a thoroughly good captain, took command in -1896; Murdoch, of course, had a thoroughly sound knowledge of the game; -but his better judgment was too frequently hampered by the ceaseless -chattering and advice of one or two men who never could grasp the fact -that in the cricket-field there can only be one captain. - -The chief qualifications for a good captain are a sound knowledge of -the game, a calm judgment, and the ability to inspire others with -confidence. - -Bad captains may be split up into three classes:-- - -1. Nervous and excitable men. - -2. Dull apathetic men. - -3. Bowling captains, with an aversion to seeing anybody bowl but -themselves. - -1. The nervous and excitable class is perhaps the worst of all, and -sides which have the misfortune to be led by one of this division are -indeed heavily handicapped. The chief peculiarity of a captain of this -sort is that he seems never to be able to keep still for a moment in -the field. He is continually rushing about, altering the field every -over without any reason, shouting excitedly at the top of his voice -whenever a fielder has to stop or throw up the ball, and generally -creating a feeling of uneasiness and excitement among players and -spectators. He is at one moment tearing his hair distractedly because -some unfortunate fielder has let a ball through his legs, and the next -shouting and dancing with excitement and joy when some exceptionally -good catch or bit of fielding has got rid of a dangerous batsman. - -2. A member of the second class may be easily recognised. He walks -slowly to his place at the end of each over with his eyes fixed on the -ground, as if in deep thought. In reality he is thinking of nothing, -or, at any rate, nothing connected with the game. He has put his two -best bowlers on, and so long as a wicket falls every thirty or forty -runs, what does it matter whether or not time is being wasted by a -series of profitless short-pitched maiden overs? It is the bowler’s -duty, not his, to get the batsmen out, and if the latter put on forty -runs without a wicket falling, why it will be time enough then to try -someone else, and perhaps later on he himself might have a turn with -lobs if things get into a very bad state. It does not take long, with a -captain like this, for a side to get thoroughly demoralised and slack. - -3. The bowling captains suffer from the very opposite of the -feebleness which affects the last class; over-keenness is their bane. -They are generally moderate bowlers, who at times enjoy a fair amount -of success, and who are often very valuable to their side as changes. -But the power of bowling wherever and for as long as they please is too -much for them. Over after over hit to all parts of the field, without -the slightest suspicion of a chance of a wicket, only convinces the -self-confident captain that something must happen sooner or later--and -something generally does after the match has been bowled away. The -fascination that bowling has for captains and the danger it often leads -to is a good reason for pausing before selecting as captain anyone -who has any pretensions in this branch of the game. It is sometimes, -however, impossible for a side to recognise anyone as captain except -a bowler. He may be the oldest and most experienced member of the -team, or perhaps from his position as a cricketer it may be out of -the question to pass him over, and then, of course, the best of a bad -job must be made. But a captain who is also a bowler has much heavier -responsibilities in the field than one who is not. Even if he happens -not to be over-anxious about trundling all day himself, he is apt from -shyness and diffidence of his own merits not to put himself on at -all--another extreme into which some captains before now have fallen. - -The duties of a captain are of two kinds: those out of the field and -those in it, and it is proposed to discuss them in the order named. -The first duty of a captain is the choice of his team; but as it so -frequently happens, nowadays, that the team is chosen for him by the -committee of his county or his club, this topic may be passed over till -we discuss the duties of the captains at the Universities and Public -Schools. - -When the team is chosen, the captain’s first duty is to win the toss; -and assuming that by the aid of his lucky sixpence he has succeeded -in so doing, he should at once decide whether he or his opponent is -to begin the batting. It is a very old saying that the side that wins -the toss should go in, and it is a very true one. No captain who wins -the toss and puts the other side in deserves to win the match, unless -there are some very exceptional circumstances to be taken into his -consideration. There is, perhaps, only one reason to justify a captain -putting the other side in first. _If the ground, previously hard, has -been softened by a night’s rain, and if at the time of beginning it is -drying under a hot baking sun, and if the captain is tolerably sure -that it is going to be a fine day_, then he will do well to put the -other side in. There must be present these three conditions of ground -and weather before he _is_ justified in refusing to bat. The ground -will then for the first hour and a half or two hours make a bowling -wicket; the top soft in the early morning, and gradually getting caked -under the hot sun, will in the afternoon, if the weather keeps fine -and it has been _hard_ before the rain, assume its former hardness and -become easy for batting for the last few hours of the day’s play. If -the ground has been soft before the rain and has been made still softer -by the rain, it is madness to put the other side in. The first two or -three hours will then be easy for batting, as a very slow soft wicket -is always against the bowlers, and it will not be till after several -hours of hot sun have been on it that it will begin to get caked and -difficult for the batsman. Suppose the weather looks uncertain and -broken, and the glass has been gradually going down, a captain should -never in any state of the ground risk putting his opponents in. Rain is -always in favour of the in side; bowlers cannot stand and cannot hold -the ball, which, wet and slippery, cannot be made to take any twist or -screw that the bowler may try to give it. - -Sometimes in a one-day match it may be advisable to put the other side -in under circumstances different from the above, circumstances which -are for the captain alone to judge of, and which it is impossible to -discuss. Suppose a very strong side is playing against a very much -weaker one. It may be that the captain of the former is afraid that -if his side once goes to the wickets, so many runs will be made as to -preclude all probability of finishing the match; and he may be content -after conference with the members of his team to take the undoubted -risk of putting the other side in; it is, however, a very dangerous -thing to do at any time, and his finesse may very possibly end -disastrously to his side in the imperfect light of the evening. - -There are, however, _some_ disadvantages in batting first. In the -first place, nearly every cricketer is a better man after luncheon -than before. Do not let this be understood for a moment as a hint -that the overnight carousals of cricketers (very pleasant though they -be) are such as to interfere with correctness of eye and steadiness -of hand in the morning. Far be it from me to suggest such a thing. -But every man is fitter in the afternoon, his eye is more accustomed -to the light, and his digestion is better. And besides, the men that -walk to the wickets to bat the first time they go into the field are -apt to be more nervous than those who have been playing a few hours -and have got accustomed to the light and general surroundings. These -are disadvantages certainly, but they are as nothing compared to the -advantages gained by batting first. These include getting the best -of the light, the best of the wicket, and, last but not least, the -incalculable advantage of having in the last innings of the match -to save and not get runs on a wicket that has previously stood the -wear and tear of three innings. The side that bats second is nearly -always in at the close of the first day’s play, and the lights and -shadows between six and seven often make the ball very difficult to -judge accurately; at Lord’s, especially, the light gets bad towards -the close of the day; a haze overspreads the ground, making clear and -accurate sight extremely difficult. As for the respective difficulties -of making and saving runs, a cricketer need only look at his scores and -references to see how often the out side at the close of a match has -prevented the in side from getting the runs required. The feeling of -responsibility which affects the batsmen on these occasions creates an -over-anxiety to play steadily and run no risks, and often results in -feeble play. Then the bowlers and fielders are nerved to their utmost -endeavour to keep the runs down, every fielder runs after the ball at -the very top of his speed, half-a-dozen men are backing up to prevent -an overthrow, and the bowler not only does all he knows to secure a -wicket, but strives hard to avoid the delivery of a punishable ball. -Whenever a side goes in for the last innings of the match against a big -score and wins, one may feel sure the match has been won by sound and -sterling cricket. There are many well-known instances of the fielding -side pulling the match out of the fire at the very last moment. In the -Oxford and Cambridge match in 1875, Cambridge in their last innings -wanted 175 runs to win. Seven wickets fell for 114. The eighth went -down at 161. Before this wicket fell it looked any odds on Cambridge, -but the eleven were eventually all out for 168, and lost the match -by six runs. In England _v._ Australia at the Oval in 1882, England, -the last innings, wanted 85 to win, but only made 77. The annals of -cricket are full of instances showing that it is better at the end -of a match to have to save runs than make them. We remember playing -in a match some years ago in Scotland, where the folly of putting in -the other side first on a good wicket was clearly shown. It was a two -days’ match, and the two best batsmen on the side which lost the toss -had been travelling all night from England. This, in spite of a good -wicket, induced the captain who had been successful in the toss to put -the other side in. One of these travel-worn and weary batsmen knocked -up over ninety runs, the ground began to cut up, and the side that -had refused to bat first came utterly to grief. As the losing captain -left the ground, he said, ‘One thing this match has taught me--_never_ -to put the other side in first.’ The following year the same match -was arranged, and once more the toss was won by the same captain. The -ground was very soft indeed, in fact sodden with days of heavy rain. -Again, in spite of the former sad experience, the other side were put -in first and made over 200 runs. The ground was too soft for bowlers -to put any life into the ball, and all bowling was comparatively easy. -Next day the ground had got firmer and more solid, and the side that -won the toss was again dismissed for two insignificant totals. - -With regard to the order in which a captain should send in his men, a -good deal depends on the strength of the batting he has at command. -With a weakish batting team it is, in our opinion, always better to -send in the best batsman first, assuming of course he has no objection -to the place. It is of great importance to give the best batsman every -possible advantage, and the men who go first to the wickets have a -great advantage over the others. They have less waiting for their -innings, and consequently less of that restless nervousness from which -few men are free; they have the best of the wicket; they have often -loosish bowling just at first, before the bowlers have warmed to their -work; and, last but certainly not least, they are batting a new ball. -Few people realise what a difference a new ball makes to the batsman; -it goes cleaner and firmer off the bat than an old one, and, what is -better than all, a hard new ball is much more difficult to twist than -one that has had a hundred runs made off it. Let anyone look at an -old bowler who has to begin the bowling: his first action is to rub -the ball on the ground in the hope of taking off even a little of its -slippery newness; it is not, however, till after its surface has been -considerably worn that it begins to take much notice of any twist, at -any rate on a hard ground. - -With such advantages to be gained by going in first it would be a pity -not to give the best batsman the chance of making a good start for his -side. A good start gives confidence to the shaky batsman, and shows -the bowlers that they are not to have it all their own way. Sometimes -the best batsman on a side does not care about going in first; if so, -it is always well to consult his wishes and humour him, but he should -_never_ go in later than second wicket. With the best batsman should -go some steady correct bat, one who plays the game thoroughly and does -not take liberties with the bowling. In these days of perfect grounds -it is a vast mistake to send in first a regular ‘sticker,’ one who -scores at the rate of eight or ten an hour. The stonewallers of our -cricket-fields have a great deal to answer for in the heavy indictment -against modern players of leaving so many unfinished matches. An -account was lately given in the papers of a man recognised as a -first-class county bat who was in on a fast hard wicket in the first -innings of a match three hours and forty minutes for thirty-two runs. -More shame to him! He did his best to draw the match, and by puddling -about for so long only helped to wear out the ground for more capable -scorers who were to follow him. Sometimes, when the ground is very bad, -it is good to have a sticker, but taken altogether cricket would be -very much better off if the whole race of stickers occasionally adopted -a somewhat freer style. Nobody objects to slow scoring so long as the -batsmen are playing good correct cricket, playing the straight ones -with a straight bat and cutting or hitting the crooked ones; but every -cricketer objects to seeing ball after ball simply stopped without the -slightest attempt to make a run. - -Two very fast run-getting batsmen should not be sent in together; they -are apt to run each other a bit off their legs. W. G. Grace and A. P. -Lucas were as good a pair for first that have ever been seen; both -played sound correct cricket: the former scored freely, the latter when -the ground was hard quite fast enough; and Shrewsbury and Stoddart were -about as good. - -After the first two have been selected the others must follow generally -in order of merit; it is as well not to put in two hard-hitters -together if possible, as it often tends to make one hit against the -other. First one makes a big hit; the other feels bound to follow suit, -quite irrespective of the pitch of the ball, and loses his wicket. It -is always an excellent thing to have one or two real good hitters, but -they should be kept apart as far as possible in their innings; sixth -or seventh wicket down is a very useful place for a hard hitter; the -bowling has often begun to get a trifle loose by that time, and good -hitting may make a dreadful mess of it in a very short time. - -If any of the bowlers on whom the captain relies for his main attack -happen to be goodish batsmen and likely to make a few runs, it is just -as well to let their innings come off as early as convenient. A bowler -who makes forty or fifty runs at the close of an innings never bowls -as well after the running about as he would do had he made nothing, -and it is consequently best if possible to insure him a rest before he -begins his more important duties as bowler. It is exceptional to find -a man successful in batting and bowling in the same match. There are a -good number of modern cricketers who are very fair all-round men, and -shine at times in both branches of the game; but it very rarely happens -that success awaits them in both in the same match. Sometimes we find a -well-known bowler piling up heaps of runs, but on looking at the other -side of the score-sheet we generally perceive that he has done it at -the expense of his wickets. Alfred Shaw, the famous Nottingham bowler, -used at times to bat with great success, but when he did so he was -nearly always unsuccessful with the ball. - -When once the captain has arranged the order in which his men are to -bat he should stick to it. It is worrying and harassing to the batsmen -to be continually shifted up and down. We once saw one of the best -batsmen in England put in last but one because the captain thought -he looked nervous. His side was beaten by a few runs, and without -his having received one single ball. An order made out before the -innings begins is more likely to be correct than one hashed and cut -about amidst excitement and anxiety. Never should a captain change his -order in the second innings; of course a man who is in particularly -good form may be given a hoist up a place or so, but the bad bats of -the team should not be sent in first so long as there is the remotest -possibility of losing; and at cricket this contingency is nearly always -on the cards. The good batsmen do not wish to go in if there is only an -hour or an hour and a half to play; they may get out and cannot make a -really big score, so they fight shy for their average’s sake. Captains -should put a stop to this and insist on their taking their proper -place; first, because the side may otherwise be beaten, and secondly, -because those who have the advantage of going in first in favourable -circumstances should also take their turn when things are not so bright. - -After a captain has written out his order of going in, he should -carefully watch the innings from the first to the very last ball. -A watchful captain can at times greatly help his side; a shout of -‘steady’ when a young batsman appears to be getting rash in his play, -or when two players are getting a little abroad as to running, often -comes with great effect and authority from a captain, and may prevent -such a catastrophe as that represented in the illustration opposite. -A word of encouragement to a nervous player as he leaves the pavilion -may also often be of service. On no account should a captain ever abuse -a batsman, no matter what rash stroke or foolish lack of judgment -has cost him his wicket. Nothing is so galling to a batsman when he -has made a bad stroke or been guilty of a mistake as being publicly -derided or reproved. Afterwards, when the keen sense of vexation has -somewhat subsided, a quiet word of advice may be given, and will have -much more effect than a noisy public remonstrance. A good cricketer who -has made a bad stroke and thereby lost his wicket knows better than -any spectator what a mistake he has committed. Pavilion worthies, ye -who love cricket for its own sake, ye who sit for hours criticising -every ball and every stroke, forbear, we pray you, out-spoken remarks -on the arrival of a discomfited batsman. ‘What on earth possessed you -to try to hit a straight one to leg?’ ‘You never seemed at home the -whole time!’ ‘You can’t keep that leg of yours out of the way!’ are all -remarks that may be withheld at any rate till the keen sense of failure -has diminished. - -[Illustration: LUCIEN DAVIS - -Run out.] - -It may possibly happen that during the course of an innings a -point which during the summer of 1887 was considerably discussed, and -about which some very extraordinary remarks have been made, may crop -up for decision by the captain. Supposing he considers that his side -has made enough runs to win the match, and that if any more are made -there will not be sufficient time to get the other side out. Is he -justified or not in giving orders to his men to get out on purpose? A -great controversy arose on this point about ten years ago, owing to the -captain of one of our leading counties considering that he was entitled -to give such orders. If this question be looked at from a cricketer’s -point of view--and by that is meant from one which is in every way -honourable and to the furtherance of the true interests of the game--it -will be seen at once that a captain has a perfect right to ask his men -to get out whenever he considers enough runs have been made to insure -victory. - -The true principle of the game is, we take it, that every side should -do its utmost honourably to win the match. In days gone by, when -grounds were rough and uneven, every match had to be completed in a -much shorter time than is now allowed. In these times of improved -batting and perfection in grounds, three whole days have been decided -on as the time within which every county or club must win, lose, or -draw the match. The game is not to lose or to draw; it is to win; and -the side that can win most matches in the time allowed is plainly -the best side. And should a side make so many runs as to render it -impossible to win if they make more, whereas if they get out they must -almost inevitably win, and can scarcely lose, we consider it would not -be acting up to the true principle of the game if it did not get out. -Besides, what sport or individual interest to a batsman is there in -making runs after the match is practically finished? A man does not -play at cricket for himself so much as for his side; it is not the -number of individual notches or wickets that falls to his lot which -delights the true cricketer: it is the actual result of ‘won or lost.’ -What pleasure does a member of either of the University elevens derive -from making fifty every innings he plays in the Inter-University -matches if all his matches are lost? There are some who say that -directly the principle is recognised that a man has a right to get out -on purpose in order to gain victory for his side, it will open the -door to all sorts of shady tricks in the game, and there will be no -guarantee to the cricket-loving public that a side is trying. We cannot -see the relevancy of this argument; if a man sacrifices himself for -his side, the more honour is due to him. It is suggested that if the -batting side has a right to get out or to forego its right of batting, -the fielding side has a right to drop catches purposely and to bowl no -balls and wides so as to avoid being beaten. If this latter course were -permitted, it would be in direct contradiction to the true principle of -the game--viz. the endeavour to win; it would be a dishonest subterfuge -to prevent victory from rewarding the side that had played the best; it -would be an un-English, dog-in-the-manger policy, and, in our opinion, -it would entitle the umpires to say that the game was not being played -fairly. There is a vast difference in principle between getting out -on purpose in order to win and bowling and fielding badly in order -to snatch victory from the best side. A captain is, then, not only -perfectly justified, but is bound in the interests of his side, and in -the true interests of the game, to order his men to get out if that is -the only way to win. - -[In 1894 the M.C.C. passed a law to the effect that the side which -goes in second shall follow their innings if they have scored 120 -runs less (not 80 as formerly) than the opposite side in a three days -match, or 80 runs in a two days match, and power was also given for the -in-side on the last day of a match to declare the innings at an end. -This last most important rule was passed partly in order to prevent -drawn matches, and partly to prevent cricket lapsing into burlesque, as -it has on several occasions. But still the true principle alluded to in -the beginning of the preceding paragraph is difficult to find, and the -awkward question still remains, as it is within the right of a captain -to order his men to get out that he may follow on, is it not within the -opposing captain’s right to order his bowlers to bowl wides to prevent -the follow on? The motive is the same in each case: one captain desires -to follow on because he thinks that by following on he has a better -chance of winning the match; the other captain is of the same opinion; -is it wrong, therefore, for him to try and defeat that object by -bowling wides? I am not able to say that it is. One captain to make his -side follow on orders his batsmen to play skittles; the other captain -to prevent a follow on orders his bowlers to play skittles. Where is -the difference in principle? There is a difference of another kind, -which is, that it is easier for a batsman to get out on purpose without -making it appear to be a burlesque than it is for a bowler to bowl -wides or no balls on purpose. A batsman may run himself out or put his -leg in front, and nobody wonders; but if a steady bowler bowls three -wides running, the most ignorant spectator sees through the game at -once, and yells accordingly. The problem may be stated in another way. -Is it cricket to sacrifice runs by running yourself out or knocking -down your wicket? If the answer is in the affirmative, then state your -reason why it is wrong for a bowler to sacrifice runs by bowling wides -or no balls. To a genuine cricketer it is equally unpleasant to see -cricket turned into burlesque by the batsmen as by the bowlers; what -is difficult to understand is why the batsmen should be allowed to -practise burlesque and command the applause of the crowd, while the -bowler is hooted and yelled at. - -The question is a most difficult one to answer, and perhaps the most -satisfactory solution may be in the direction of abolishing the follow -on altogether, and giving power to close the innings at any time. Every -proposal has its drawbacks, and the drawback to this is that it gives -an additional advantage to winning the toss; but it is not easy to see -that there is any better solution of the question.--R. H. L.] - -In club and county matches a captain whose side is batting may often -have little duties to perform, such as hurrying his men in after the -fall of a wicket and allowing no time to be wasted, &c. There is -nothing so annoying to a keen cricketer as to see the field waiting -three or four minutes whilst some ‘local swell’ calmly buckles his pads -and saunters sleepily to the wicket. A captain should see that the next -batsman is always ready to go in directly the preceding one reaches the -pavilion; and a good experienced captain can also give many valuable -hints to the younger members of his team as they sit waiting for their -innings. ‘Play your own game, of course;’ he is the first one to know -and realise the truth of the old saying; but (and there are often many -_buts_) ‘for goodness sake don’t try and hit that curly bowler unless -you are on the pitch of him;’ ‘if you play back to that fast chap you -are done; he is out and away faster than he looks;’ ‘watch that man at -cover: he’s as quick as lightning with his return.’ All these little -odds and ends from an old hand are well worth the attention of a young -player; they all help to give him more confidence and more knowledge -and experience, and consequently make him a better cricketer. And -then a captain’s eyes must be sharp to detect any slovenliness in the -dress of a batsman. What a sorry sight it is to see a man going to -the wickets with his pad-straps hanging two or three inches down his -legs, his trousers unfolded and sticking out from behind his pads, -his shirtsleeves hanging loose, and altogether having a general air -of being a slovenly fellow! A captain must note this; he knows that -there are a good many better ways of getting out than being caught from -one’s pad-straps or loose trousers that flap gaily in the breeze, or -from one’s shirtsleeves that float round the forearm with so great an -expanse of canvas, looking for all the world like a bishop’s sleeve. -All these little things are worth knowing; cricket is a game with a -great deal of luck in it and full of a great many odd chances, and the -sooner a young player realises that he must do all he can to minimise -the chances against himself, the better cricketer he will become and -the more runs he will make. - -The duties of a captain in the field are far more onerous than those -out of it. It is here that his good qualities are tested, his knowledge -and judgment of the game put to the proof. The most difficult task -he has to perform is the management of the bowling. It, of course, -occasionally happens that his two best bowlers are put on, and bowl -successfully without a chance during the whole of the innings. But this -is a very exceptional occurrence, and is but seldom seen in first-class -cricket, and then only when the ground is sticky or crumbled. It is in -the bowling changes and placing that a captain’s skill is principally -seen. On a hard fast wicket it is best to begin with fast bowling at -one end and slow at the other. A good overhand fast bowler on a hard -wicket has more chance of making the ball rise, and getting catches in -the slips and at the wickets, than a slow one; but it is always well -to have different-paced bowling on at either end, as in this way the -batsman’s eye does not get thoroughly accustomed to one pace. The late -F. Morley--in his day the best left-hand fast bowler in England--and -A. Shaw were always individually more successful when playing together -for their county, the fast left hand and slow right being an excellent -variation for the eye of the batsman. Poor Morley, what a good bowler -he was! In our opinion he was the best fast bowler we have had in -England for a very long time. He was a good pace, had a beautifully -easy left-handed delivery, just over his shoulder, and was most -wonderfully accurate in his length. He had a good spin and break-back -on his bowling, and every now and then sent in one that came with the -arm and required a lot of playing. His early death caused a great gap -in the ranks of our professionals, and was much lamented by every class -of cricketers; for a more honest and unassuming professional player -than Fred Morley never went into the cricket-field. His knowledge of -geography was not up to his cricket capabilities; for after a serious -collision in the Indian Ocean, on his voyage to Australia in 1882, a -mishap which subsequently ended fatally to him, he said: ‘No more ships -for me: I’ll home again by the overland route!’ - -At the beginning of the innings the two bowlers put on should both be -asked which end suits them best; if both want the same, the captain -should give the choice to the one on whom, taking into consideration -the state of the ground, he relies most. The field should be placed -according to the style of the opposing batsman, and in doing this the -captain should act with the consent of the bowler. There are many -captains who change the field from time to time without ever consulting -the bowler, who, if a cricketer, knows better than anyone else where -his bowling is likely to be hit. - -No rule can be laid down with regard to the frequency of bowling -changes, except the more the better. A bowler should never be kept on -if he is not getting wickets, and if the batsmen are playing him with -ease. It goes no way towards winning a match to bowl ten or a dozen -short-pitched consecutive maiden overs. Directly the batsmen seem to -have guessed the length and style of bowling it should be changed, if -only for a few overs, while some new style is tried for a short time. -If a long stand be made, every style of bowling should be quickly -tried; thirty runs should never be allowed without a change of some -sort, unless the bowling happens to be particularly puzzling to the -batsman, and is being badly played. - -As regards the placing of the field, it has already been said that -usually the bowler is best able to guess where his own bowling is most -likely to be hit; but there are many things which a captain should -recollect, as the suggestions of a captain in whom his bowlers place -confidence are always accepted readily. He should keep his eye on -short-slip, as this place is, especially on a fast wicket, the most -important of all. There are more good batsmen dismissed at short-slip -and the wicket, on good wickets, than at any other places. It is an -extraordinary fact connected with short-slip that, unless he has had a -great deal of experience, he is continually shifting his position; one -over he will be standing fine and deep and the next square and near to -the wicket. It is the captain’s duty, even more than the bowler’s, to -see that this does not happen. - -On a true hard wicket we never like to see a captain putting his -mid-on or short-leg close in to the batsman, to field what is called -‘silly’ mid-on; the risk of standing near in on a hard wicket to a -batsman who can hit at all is not by any means slight, and we have -on several occasions seen men placed in this position get very nasty -blows. Boyle, the Australian mid-on, stood about as near in as any man -ever did stand; on sticky grounds he made many catches, on fast grounds -he missed many which if standing further back he would have caught. He -not seldom received nasty injuries, and on one occasion was laid up -for several weeks with a broken or injured bone in his hand. A quick -active field at mid-on who will run in when he sees the batsman making -a quiet forward stroke on the leg side, and when he observes a leg-side -ball kick up higher than usual, is all that should be required. In -a match at Melbourne, in 1882, we recollect a very amusing little -incident in which mid-on played a prominent part. The Australians were -batting, and Bates, the Yorkshireman, had just dismissed two of their -best bats, McDonnell and Giffen, in two consecutive balls. Bonnor, -who used to congratulate himself, and not without a certain amount of -justification, that he could make mincemeat of our slow bowling, was -the next man in. Somebody suggested that, in the faint hope of securing -a ‘hat’ for Bates, we should try a silly mid-on. Bates faithfully -promised to bowl a fast shortish ball between the legs and the wicket, -and said he was quite certain Bonnor would play slowly forward to it. -Acting on the faith of this, W. W. Read boldly volunteered to stand -silly mid-on for one ball. In came the giant, loud were the shouts of -welcome from the larrikins’ throats; now would the ball soar over the -green trees even higher than yonder flock of twittering parrots. As -Bates began to walk to the wickets to bowl, nearer and nearer crept -our brave mid-on; a slow forward stroke to a fast shortish leg-stump -ball landed the ball fairly in his hands not more than six feet -from the bat. The crowd would not believe it, and Bonnor was simply -thunderstruck at mid-on’s impertinence; but Bates had done the hat -trick for all that, and what is more, he got a very smart silver tall -hat for his pains. - -[Illustration: Eton _v._ Harrow.] - -The duties of captains of the University teams and of the Public -Schools are far more arduous than those of a captain of a county or a -club eleven. At our large Public Schools the captain is responsible for -the selection of the team; he may be assisted to a certain extent by a -committee, but the actual filling up of the vacant places in his eleven -generally devolves on him alone. An energetic and keen boy captain will -usually manage before the close of the summer term to get together a -team of fair merit; even if the stuff he has to work upon is inferior -in quality, the great amount of time at his disposal for practice, and -the assistance he receives from the school professionals and masters, -ought always to ensure a keen captain having a tolerable eleven before -the summer holidays begin. It may be taken as true that a bad fielding -school eleven denotes a bad and slack captain. Whatever may be the -batting and bowling material at his disposal, a boy captain can, if -he likes, have a good fielding side; and if in his school matches -at Lord’s, or elsewhere, he finds that he loses the match by slack -fielding, he has none to blame but himself. None of our best county -teams can field as boys can if they are properly taught and kept up to -the mark. There are few men of thirty taking part in the game who can -throw with any effect for more than about thirty or forty yards; their -arms and shoulders are stiff, and will not stand it, whereas boys can -all throw, and are about twice as active as many of those whose names -at the present time figure prominently in our leading fixtures. - -A school eleven, as indeed every other, only requires four regular -bowlers. ‘If you cannot win with four bowlers, you’ll never win at -all,’ is an old and true saying. But this wants a little explanation. -The four best available bowlers must be played without regard to their -batting powers, and after these four have been selected let the team be -filled up with good batsmen and fielders, quite irrespective of whether -they can bowl or not. It is an excellent thing for a side that every -man should be able to bowl a bit if wanted, and every boy should be -able to do so, but it is only necessary in choosing the team to play -four men as bowlers only. - -Every school eleven should possess a lob-bowler; if he be a good one -so much the better, but one of some sort there must be. Lobs have -always been most destructive to boys, and even very indifferent lobs -are occasionally very fatal to schools. A little practice will teach -any boy to bowl them fairly; he must take a long and rather a quick -run, and bowl just fast enough to prevent the batsman hitting the -good-length balls before they pitch. The high slow lob is generally -worthless. - -The wicket-keeper must also be trained and coached. He should be taught -the right and the wrong way to stand, and should practise keeping for a -short time every day. And, above all things, the school wicket-keeper -should know that for anything over slow and slow medium bowling he is -to have a long-stop. The number of good wicket-keepers who have been -spoilt by having to perform the office of long-stop as well as their -own is legion. There are no first-class keepers nowadays who put out -their hands on the leg side and draw the ball to the stumps; they all -jump to the leg side in front of the ball to prevent it resulting in a -four-bye, and consequently, even if lucky enough to take the ball with -their hands, they are so far from the stumps as to make it exceedingly -difficult to knock the bails off. - -A captain of a University team has not so much to do with training and -coaching his team as a school captain. By the time men have reached -their University eleven they have generally mastered the elementary -principles of the game, and require more practice and experience, -keeping up to the mark rather than coaching. A captain’s duty is -consequently to see that his men engage in constant practice at all -parts of the game, and by showing an example of keenness and energy to -inspire his team with the same qualities. Some men at the University, -and especially those fresh from the restraint of a public school, -occasionally require a few words of advice about the mode of life -which is necessary for undergoing with success the wear and tear of a -University cricket season. A ’Varsity team has about six weeks’ hard -work, and no man can bear the strain of this if, at the same time, -he is keeping late hours and distributing his attentions impartially -amongst all the numerous delicacies that adorn the University -dinner-tables during the May term. No strict training is required, -thank goodness! Cricket does not demand of her votaries the hollow face -and attenuated frame, and too often the undermined constitution, that -a long term of arduous training occasionally results in, especially to -a youth of unmatured strength; but a cricketer should live a regular -life and abstain at table from all things likely to interfere with his -digestion and wind. Above all else, smoky rooms should be avoided. A -small room, filled with ten or a dozen men smoking as if their very -existence depended on the amount of tobacco consumed, soon gets a -trifle foggy, and the man who remains there for long will find next -morning on waking that his head feels much heavier than usual, and his -eyes are reddish and sore. A University captain should never hesitate -to speak to any of his team on these matters, should he think warning -or rebuke necessary. - -The necessity of moderation in drink is happily a thing which few -University cricketers require to be reminded of. There are many -opinions as to what is the best drink for men when actually playing. -By best we mean that which does least harm to the eye. In hot weather -something must be drunk, and the question is, What? Our experience is -that beer and stout are both too heady and heavy, gin and ginger beer -is too sticky, sweet, &c., to the palate. In our opinion, shandy-gaff, -sherry, or claret, and soda are the most thirst-quenching, the -lightest, and the cleanest to the palate. The latter consideration is a -great one on a hot day at cricket. In a long innings the heat and the -dust are apt to make the mouth very dry and parched, and a clean drink -is especially desirable. - -As a rule a ’Varsity captain has not much difficulty in selecting the -first eight or nine of his team--there are usually that number that -stand out as far and away better than all the others--but the last two -or three places often cause him the greatest difficulty. There may -be two or three men of the same merit fighting for the last place, -inflicting sleepless nights and anxious thoughts on the captain. He -cannot make up his mind, and possibly remains undecided till the very -week before the big match. A ’Varsity team owes half its strength to -playing so much together. Every man knows and has confidence in the -others, and every man’s full merits and the use he may be to the side -are understood by the captain; consequently, the sooner the whole team -is chosen the better. - -[Illustration: A. E. STODDART] - -Now let us briefly discuss the considerations that should guide -the captain in the choice of his team. And perhaps the simplest and -best way will be to assume that a captain has to choose the best team -in England (our fictitious captain making the twelfth man on the side). -The first thing he must do is to choose his bowlers, and, as we have -said above, these must be the best four he can get, each one different -from the others in style. He wants a fast bowler to begin with (and if -the match is to be played on a hard wicket he will probably want two). -He has Mold and Lockwood to choose from, undoubtedly the two best. -If he wants one only, he must be guided by present form; whichever -is bowling the best must be selected. Let us say he has selected -Mold. This is No. 1. No. 2 must be a good left-hand bowler. Peel and -Briggs are perhaps the only two at the present time who have good -qualifications, and we think our captain would probably fix on Peel -as being the best bowler of the two. No. 3--a medium-pace to fast -round-arm bowler--is next wanted. Lohmann would be the very man, but -since ill-health at the present date prevents his appearance on the -field, let our captain bring into his team as No. 3 Lockwood. Surely -he or Mold, if not both, will prove destructive. No. 4.--Our captain -now wants a right-arm slow bowler accurate enough to keep down the runs -(if it is necessary) on a hard true wicket, and powerful enough with -the ball to take advantage of crumbled or sticky wickets. Who is he to -take? C. M. Wells of Surrey and Cambridge, Flowers of Notts, Attewell -of ditto, Wainwright of Yorkshire, A. Hearne of Kent, are all good -names. The man for this place a few years ago would have been Alfred -Shaw. What a fine bowler he was! Perhaps his best performance was in -1875, when for Notts _v._ the M.C.C. at Lord’s he bowled 162 balls for -7 runs and 7 wickets (bother the maidens: we don’t care how many of -them he bowled!), and amongst these seven wickets were W. G. Grace, -A. W. Ridley, C. F. Buller, and Lord Harris. In the same match, for -the M.C.C., A. W. Ridley with his lobs had a good analysis for the two -innings--208 balls, 46 runs, and 10 wickets. Our captain thinks for -No. 4 he cannot do better than Wainwright, and we agree with him. No. -5--the wicket-keeper--must be G. McGregor of Cambridge and Middlesex. -Alas! when this chapter was written for the first edition of this -book Pilling was the wicket-keeper selected, and we then expressed a -hope that his health would allow him to remain behind the stumps for -many years to come. Pilling died a few years ago, but those who ever -played with him will never forget the excellence of his calm and quiet -wicket-keeping, nor the gentleness and courtesy which graced his whole -character. No. 6.--Now our captain has got to fill up six places; he -has up to the present provided for getting rid of the opposite side: -he now turns his attention to the selection of his batsmen. W. G. -Grace first, no one disputes. Does someone suggest Shrewsbury? Well, -certainly, during the last seven or eight seasons he has batted most -wonderfully well; but for winning a match give us W. G. as our first -choice. Shrewsbury may be the best to prevent his side being beaten; -but we want to win, and if one man stays in the best part of a couple -of days for 150 runs there is a great chance of the game being drawn. -We like the man who makes 150 in three to four hours, and then gets -out and helps to get the other side out afterwards. So our captain -annexes W. G. as No. 6. No. 7, Shrewsbury. No. 8, A. E. Stoddart, that -sound and resolute batsman, who perhaps gives more pleasure to the -spectators than any other living cricketer. No. 9, Gunn. No. 10.--And -now, having selected nine of his team, our captain must consider what -he has and what he has not got. His team at present consists of W. G. -Grace, Shrewsbury, A. E. Stoddart, Gunn, G. McGregor, Mold, Lockwood, -Peel, and Wainwright. He has therefore the four best batsmen in -England--Grace, Shrewsbury, Stoddart, and Gunn--three sound first-class -batsmen in Lockwood, Peel, and Wainwright, a very likely run-getting -bat in McGregor, and an indifferent performer in Mold. He has six -bowlers, the four chosen and Grace and Stoddart. Now what has he in -the field? Shrewsbury will have to go point, that is evident, as he is -a fairly good point and useless elsewhere owing to his inability to -throw. Grace, Mold, and Lockwood must all be in places somewhere near -the wicket, Grace because of advancing years and stiffened muscles, the -other two because much throwing would damage their bowling. We have -Stoddart and Gunn, both excellent fielders and throwers, and these two -must be kept for fielding in the country. Peel and Wainwright are also -two good fielders, but they being bowlers will not probably be wanted -for country fielding except in an emergency. Taken as a whole, the nine -we have already got are good fieldsmen. What does our captain then want -for the tenth place? As he has already got a strong batting, bowling, -and fielding side, he must look out for a good all-round cricketer -who will strengthen his team at all points. He must take care not to -give either of his last two places to men who will weaken the side in -fielding; above all, they must be good in the field. Would W. W. Read -do for the tenth place? Unquestionably he is a magnificent batsman, -but where is he to go in the field? Shrewsbury is at point; W. W. -Read would have to field elsewhere then, and, for the same reason as -already given for W. G. Grace, he would seriously cripple the side if -required to go into the country, as undoubtedly he would have to. No. -Our captain rejects W. W. Read, and selects F. S. Jackson of Cambridge -University and Yorkshire as his tenth man. And as he is one of our most -accomplished and resolute batsmen, a fine field and thrower, and a most -useful fast change bowler, surely his inclusion in the team will add -strength to every department of it. No. 11.--The last place in the team -is a difficult task to select. The same considerations must guide the -choice here as for the tenth place. If another bowler were required we -would suggest Briggs or A. Hearne as being good bowlers and all-round -good cricketers, but our captain is already playing four men to bowl, -and has in addition the various changes already mentioned. Is there -any really first-class batsman who, if included in the team, would not -injuriously affect the fielding of the side? W. W. Read we have already -said has to be rejected. A. Ward of Lancashire is the man, a really -sound batsman and a good field and thrower. Our captain has completed -his task, and a very powerful team he has selected, strong in batting, -bowling, fielding, and throwing, and indeed a difficult nut for any -Australian side to crack. - -Such was the selection of the first English eleven about ten years ago, -but a great deal has happened since that date. At the present moment -Stoddart’s team in Australia have been so unsuccessful that though -when they started they were reckoned to be about our best eleven, for -the honour of England it must be hoped that a better is to be found. -There can be no doubt that our bowling is terribly weak, weaker on good -wickets than at any previous time in cricket history, and it seems that -we must go out of the beaten track of bowlers and try a change. Our -representative eleven to-day is chosen with no great confidence, and -many will unfavourably criticise the selection. There is no difficulty -about the batsmen, who shall be MacLaren, Ranjitsinhji, Gunn, Abel, -Jackson and Hayward, and the wicket-keeper Storer; but what about the -bowlers? Hirst is not good enough, Peel and Briggs are past their -prime, and Wainwright on good wickets is harmless. Richardson and -Hearne we still must select, but for the last two we shall select a -veteran and a youngster. Attewell shall be one and the young Essex -amateur Bull shall be the other. During the last season Bull on hard -wickets showed himself to be a slow bowler with more spin than any -other bowler in England, moreover he is not so well known; while -Attewell bowls still the best length, and can always keep runs down. - -One thing will be noticed here, and that is, that for the first time -since 1867 W. G. Grace is left out of a representative English team, -and the elements of a tragedy can be found here. For twenty-nine years -he would have been chosen, but the time has come at last; but to show -his wonderful powers, if he had been chosen now--and some people would -still choose him--it would largely be for his bowling, which is unlike -other bowling, and would still get wickets. - -An old cricketer may here be permitted to drop a tear over the -decadence of the bowling and the superlative excellence of the grounds -that has disturbed the old balance of cricket, and brought far too -prominently forward the second and third rate batsman. - -In the field all captains should be cheery and bright, and full of -encouragement to both fielders and bowlers. A despondent captain, who -becomes sad and low when things are going against him, has a most -depressing effect on his men. Cricket is a game full of so many chances -and surprises that no match is ever lost till the last ball has been -bowled, so the bowlers must be cheered and encouraged and the fielders -kept up to the mark till all is over. - -[Illustration: At wicket after bowling.] - -Everything that goes on in the game should be noticed by the captain. -If a bowler forgets to get behind the stumps when the ball is to be -returned to him by a fielder, the captain should at once call his -attention to the fact; if a fielder keeps shifting his position over -after over without orders, a gentle reminder must be given; if a -fielder throws unmercifully at the bowler or wicket-keeper when there -is no attempt at a run on the part of the batsmen, he must be spoken -to. It is a bad fault on the part of a fieldsman to knock the poor -wicket-keeper’s hands to pieces for no purpose. - -If a captain keeps his eye open on all these little things, and does -his best to eradicate them and others of the same nature from his men, -if he is a keen zealous cricketer gifted with a calm temperament and -sound judgment, he may rest assured that before he has led his men very -long he will be the captain of a good team. - - - - -[Illustration: ‘Guard please, Umpire.’] - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -UMPIRES. - -(BY A. G. STEEL.) - - -If anyone were to ask us the question ‘What class of useful men -receive most abuse and least thanks for their service?’ we should, -without hesitation, reply, ‘Cricket umpires.’ The duties of an -umpire are most laborious and irksome; they require for their proper -performance the exercise of numerous qualifications, and yet it is -always the lot of every man who dons the white coat, the present dress -of an umpire, to receive, certainly no thanks, and, too frequently, -something which is not altogether unlike abuse. Nowhere can any notice -be found in the history of cricket of the first appearance of umpires -as sole judges of the game; and from old pictures, and notably the one -at Lord’s, it is evident that, in the early days of cricket, there were -no umpires. The scoring was done by the ‘notcher,’ who stood by and -cut a notch in a stick every time a run was made, and who also most -probably would be the one to decide any point of dispute that might -arise amongst the players. The earliest copy of the laws of cricket -that we have is dated 1774; the heading is ‘The Laws of Cricket, -revised at the Star and Garter, Pall Mall, February 25, 1774, by a -committee of noblemen and gentlemen of Kent, Hampshire, Surrey, Sussex, -Middlesex, and London.’ - -These laws are the foundation of those which now govern cricket, and -in them rules were laid down with regard to umpires, some of which, -with certain modifications, are still in force. Although these laws, -promulgated in 1774, are the earliest authenticated, there is still -in existence a much older document, though the date is unknown, which -contains a few remarks on the game, entitled ‘Ye game of cricket as -settled by ye cricket club at ye Star and Garter in Pall Mall,’ and -then it goes on, ‘Laws for ye umpires,’ showing that in considerably -earlier days than 1774 umpires were recognised institutions in the game. - -It has always been the custom, till within the last few years, for each -side to choose its own umpire, even in the most important matches, -except those played at Lord’s and the Oval. The system of each side -providing its own umpire existed till 1883. It thus happened that aged -and decayed cricketers were rewarded by being chosen as umpires to -watch over the interests of their old colleagues. - -It was quite impossible for men who were thoroughly imbued with a -strong spirit of partisanship to remain perfectly impartial; however -honest and free from suspicion a man might be, his opinion, at a -critical stage of the game, could not fail to be unconsciously biassed -in favour of the side with whose name his own had been long associated. -Many men became alarmed at the idea of obtaining a reputation for -giving partial decisions, and would go to the other extreme, and decide -against their own side oftener than the facts justified. There were -also men, no doubt--but these were few and far between--who used their -important position to unfairly enhance the chances of victory for -their own side. This system was a bad one, as it made the position of -an umpire so extremely invidious: but it was not till 1883 that the -present practice was introduced. At the beginning of the season each -county now sends up the names of two or more umpires to the secretary -of the M.C.C. Then from the list of names nominated by the different -county committees the secretary has to appoint two umpires for every -county match, neither of these two being the nominees of either of -the counties that are playing in the match. This system works very -well and is a very fair one, as the judges of the game are not now -exposed to the charge of partiality, so frequently made under the old -rule, their interests being connected with neither side. The list of -what may be called the official umpires is almost totally composed of -elderly professional cricketers, who, as young men, were themselves -famous players, they are consequently men who, having spent many years -of their lives in the active pursuit of the game, possess a thorough -knowledge of its laws and practice. And our experience of the way in -which those arduous duties are performed is that, considering the -difficulties of the situation they are placed in, our English umpires, -taken as a body, give good and correct decisions. We think that this -opinion would be indorsed by most leading cricketers. - -The difficulties of an umpire are many, and the nice distinctions he -is called upon to draw over and over again during the course of the -match may be gathered from the fact that bad decisions in first-class -matches are not infrequent. And yet we adhere to the commendation -given above. It is an absolute impossibility to find an umpire who -will not make mistakes at times. The most likely slip for him to make -is, perhaps, when he is appealed to for a ‘catch at the wicket.’ Let -us just glance at some of the difficulties which may, and often do, -arise as to this decision. The umpire has to satisfy himself that the -bat or the batsman’s hand (but not the wrist) has touched the ball -before it has lodged in the wicket-keeper’s hand. There are often cases -where there is no doubt that the bat has touched the ball; the batsman -strikes at the ball and hits it so hard that the sound of the ‘click’ -may be heard by every fieldsman on the ground, and even sometimes by -the spectators; and then, of course, the umpire has no difficulty. But -supposing a batsman in playing forward to a ball just outside the off -stump apparently misses it, and the ball turns after the pitch and, -without any sound or ‘click,’ lodges in the wicket-keeper’s hand, what -has the umpire to say if appealed to? He sees the ball turn after the -pitch, and he sees it pass the bat dangerously near, but he hears no -sound; perhaps in this case no one on the field but the wicket-keeper -knows for certain what has taken place; he knows that the ball turned -from the pitch, just grazed the shoulder or edge of the bat, and -came into his hands. The batsman, perhaps, has in his forward stroke -touched the ground with his bat at the very moment the ball grazed the -bat. The jar of his bat on the ground has nullified the effect of the -touch of the ball, and he doubtless considers that if the appeal is -answered against him he has met with injustice. In a case like this -the umpire gives, or should give, the batsman the benefit of the doubt -that exists, and No. 1 bad decision is chronicled against him by the -fielding side. No blame can be attached to the umpire, he has done his -very best to give a correct decision, but the circumstances have made -it absolutely impossible for him to be certain on the point. Again, -it is sometimes next to impossible for an umpire to be sure whether a -ball has just grazed the tip of the indiarubber finger of a batsman’s -glove or not; for often in such a case no sound can be distinguished. -The batsman feels and the wicket-keeper sees it, but none else in the -field knows anything at all about what has happened. The umpire can see -the ball pass very close to the glove, but whether they have actually -touched he cannot at a distance of twenty-four or twenty-five yards -decide. An umpire may often be deceived, too, in his vision, if the -ball pass the bat quickly and the stroke of the bat towards the ball -has been a rapid one; he may hear an ominous ‘click’ that sounds like -a touch, and yet he may think that he saw daylight between them at the -moment the ball passed the bat. We have more than once in a first-class -match, in which two good umpires were engaged, struck a ball fairly -hard and seen it lodge in the wicket-keeper’s hands, and heard in -answer to a confident appeal, ‘Not out; he was nowhere near it!’ and -this when everyone in the field heard the sound, and knew it could only -have been caused by the ball meeting the bat. And again, supposing a -slight noise or ‘click’ to be heard just when a ball is passing outside -the legs of a batsman, should the ball be taken by the wicket-keeper, -it is often a most difficult thing for an umpire to be certain whether -the ‘click’ has been caused by the bat and the ball, or the batsman’s -leg or pad-strap and the ball. The click of the ball hitting a strap -or hard piece of cane in a pad is very like the sharp sound caused by -the bat hitting the ball, and this, added to the impossibility of the -umpire actually seeing whether a leg ball passes close to the bat or -not, makes appeals for leg-side catches at the wicket extremely hard to -answer with any degree of certainty. - -These are a few instances of the many very difficult cases which an -umpire may be called upon to decide at any moment during a match. Many -others will probably occur to the minds of most of the readers of this -chapter, at any rate of those who have any practical experience of -the game. We do not, however, propose to mention all these cases at -present; some of them we shall have to refer to later on. - -We think enough has been said as to the difficult nature of the post -to show conclusively that it is an impossibility to find an umpire -who will not be liable to give bad verdicts. It is most unfortunate -that all umpires, in addition to having to bear the heavy weight of -knowing that they may at any minute be called upon to give a decision -about which they are uncertain and consequently liable to err, -have also too often to suffer from the abuse of those who consider -themselves aggrieved by wrong decisions. The chief principle that -tends to harmonise the game, and make it the quiet English pastime -that it is, is that the umpire’s decision shall be final. It would be -impossible to play the game if this were not so; how would matches -ever be finished satisfactorily if every batsman had a right to remain -at the wickets until he himself thought he was fairly out? And yet, -though this principle is universally known as the main one on which -the prosperity of the game depends, we unfortunately find but too -frequently, and even amongst some of the leading cricketers of the -day, a tendency to revile and abuse the unfortunate umpire whenever -an appeal has been given against them. If a batsman considers he has -been given out wrongfully, he has a perfect right, of course, to give -his opinion of what has taken place privately to anyone; but he has no -right to stand at his wicket wrangling with and abusing the umpire, -nor has he a right to declare publicly to the pavilion on his return -from the wickets that a wrong decision has been given. Too often one -sees a sulky, bad-tempered-looking face arrive at the pavilion, and -in loud tones declare he was not within a yard of it, or ‘it didn’t -pitch within a foot of the wicket.’ Such conduct is unsportsmanlike and -ungentlemanly, and, what is more, is unfair, as such a statement is a -public accusation made against the professional capacity of an absent -man who has no opportunity of refuting or contradicting it. - -First-class amateur cricketers should remember that it is impossible -for them to pay too much deference to the decisions of umpires, as -it is from them that the standard or tone of morality in the game is -taken. They should ask themselves, if they wrangle and dispute with -umpires in first-class matches when a large assemblage is present, what -will happen in smaller matches, when there is not the same publicity -and notoriety to restrain the rowdiness which has before now been the -result of a wordy warfare with ‘the sole judge of fair and unfair -play.’ We admit that there is nothing so disappointing and annoying to -a batsman as to be given out by what is really a bad decision. Take, -for instance, a man who cannot for business reasons get away as much -as he would like to indulge in his favourite game. He has been looking -forward for weeks to a particular match, perhaps one of the greatest -importance; he has been practising hard for the last month in his spare -time in the evenings after business hours. The eventful day comes, the -time for his innings arrives, and just when he has settled down with -ten or fifteen to his score, and has begun to find himself thoroughly -at home with the bowling, his hopes are dashed to the ground by a -bad decision. He is maddened with anger and disappointment for the -moment, and every cricketer will heartily sympathise with him; but if -he allows his feelings to get the better of him, and indulges in an -open exhibition of anger against the umpire, that man should never play -cricket again until he has satisfied himself that, come what may, he -will be able to curb himself sufficiently to prevent such exhibitions, -which act so greatly against the true interests of the game. - -The majority of cricketers, we are happy to say, are not open abusers -of umpires and their decisions, though a considerable number have -earned this unenviable notoriety. But by far the greater proportion -of batsmen, though not open cavillers at the umpire’s verdict, always -refuse to allow that his judgment, when adverse to them, is correct, -and especially in cases of l.b.w. It is one of the most extraordinary -things connected with the game that, no matter how straight the ball -may have pitched, how low down it may have hit the leg, and how -straight it is going off the pitch to the wicket when stopped by the -opposing leg, there is not one batsman in twenty who will allow that he -is fairly out. ‘The ball pitched off the wicket;’ ‘It would have gone -over the wicket;’ ‘It was twisting like anything and would have missed -the wicket;’ and ‘How could it be out? I hit it hard,’ are the usual -excuses that are made to a knot of the crestfallen batsman’s friends -and sympathisers after his return to the pavilion. Sometimes, no doubt, -one or more of these excuses may be perfectly true, and the batsman has -been unfortunately dismissed by an error in judgment on the part of the -umpire; but in far the larger number of instances they are simply sham -excuses invented by the player to cover his own discomfiture. In some -cases a batsman may really believe that the ball would have missed the -wicket or did not pitch straight, and if so he has a perfect right, -if he thinks fit, to tell his own friends what is opinion is; but as -a rule the umpire’s judgment is right and the batsman’s is wrong. The -mere fact of a ball hitting the leg when it is pitched _so nearly_ -straight and would have _so nearly_ hit the wicket as to justify an -appeal to the umpire, shows that the batsman has seriously erred either -in his judgment of the pitch of the ball or in his stroke. He has made -a mistake--the ball hitting his leg is a proof that he has done so; and -yet, with this proof staring him in the face, he comes out and states -positively what practically comes to this: ‘The ball must have been -very nearly straight and would have very nearly hit the stumps, or else -the bowler would not have asked; I mistook the pace, or the pitch, or -the flight of the ball, or all three of them at the same time; but now -that I have had time to think over it, I know for certain the ball was -not pitched straight or would not have hit the wicket.’ This is the -logical conclusion of the vast number of excuses that are made with -regard to decisions of l.b.w. - -[Illustration: A clear case.] - -When a batsman says that he has hit the ball, it does not always follow -that it is correct, for under certain circumstances he may imagine he -has touched it when in fact he has not done so. For instance, if he -plays forward with the bat close to his left leg, he may slightly touch -his pad or his boot, which may produce in his mind the same impression -as if the bat had touched the ball. In a forward stroke a slight touch -on a hard ground with the end of the bat will often convey the same -idea. There are one or two well-known cricketers, thoroughly keen and -honest players of the game, whose habit of finding fault with umpires’ -decisions adverse to themselves has often provoked great amusement. -We remember on one occasion taking part in a match in which one of -these critical gentlemen was playing. Shortly after his innings began -he missed a perfectly straight ball, and just as it was going to hit -the centre of the middle stump it came into contact with a thick -well-padded leg. He had to go. Shortly afterwards in the pavilion he -was overheard replying in answer to a friend, ‘Out? why, it didn’t -pitch straight by a quarter of an inch!’ - -What has been said with regard to the duty of batsmen to abide by -umpires’ decisions applies equally to bowlers. What can be worse form -than a public exhibition of temper on the part of a bowler because an -appeal is not answered in his favour? ‘Wha-a-a-t?’ shouts a bowler at -the top of his voice, after a negative answer to an appeal, his eyes -glaring at the poor unfortunate umpire as if he wanted to eat him. -‘What _is_ out, then?’ Perhaps in the next ball or two the batsman is -palpably out, either bowled or caught. ‘How’s that, then, sir?’ says -the bowler in sarcastic glee, as if his success was directly due to -the former verdict of the umpire. All this sort of thing is very poor -cricket, and not calculated to promote the true spirit of friendliness -which should distinguish every match if the game is to be enjoyed. - -It is in club cricket that there is always the greatest number of -disputes about umpires’ decisions. This is owing to the fact that the -only way in which umpires can be procured is by each side bringing -its own. As a rule the professional bowler of a club stands as umpire -in all matches, and this system, as before mentioned, cannot fail -occasionally to cause a little wrangling. Supposing, for instance, a -side has to get half a dozen more runs to win a match with only one -wicket to fall, and the umpire of the fielding side, by giving the -last hope out leg before wicket, decides the game in favour of his -employers, it must inevitably stir up some angry feelings, especially -as a batsman is scarcely ever known to admit the impeachment of being -fairly out l.b.w. Considering the keenness and anxiety to win of every -cricketer worthy of the name, the fact of serious disputes being almost -unknown is a remarkable instance of the generosity and manliness of -English players. - -But it is in _bonâ fide_ country or rustic matches that there is most -often good reason for finding fault with the decisions of umpires. We -are not speaking of matches between clubs who can boast enough members -to enable them to engage a professional bowler, level a good large -square piece of turf, and erect a local habitation in the shape of a -neat and pretty little pavilion; but of matches between clubs in remote -villages, where the village common, rough and uneven as it is, suffices -for practice on the week-day evenings and for matches on Saturday -afternoons, where the only weapons of the batsmen are the old well-worn -and usually desperately heavy club bats, where the village barber is -the bowler, the village baker the best batsman, and the umpire, on -whom his side relies for victory more than on all the other men in the -village, the publican. There are still such clubs in existence, though -not nearly so many now as in days gone by. The increased popularity of -the game, and the greater facilities for getting about the country, -have caused many of these old village clubs to become large and -well-to-do. One of the greatest treats that any cricket-lover can -have is to take part in a match between two really primitive village -clubs. The old fast under-arm bowling, now sixty years at least out of -date in first-class cricket, still preserves its pristine efficacy on -the rough uneven turf, and against the untutored batsmen. The running -and the shouting and the general excitement when the parson misses a -catch, or the butcher is bowled, is very pleasing to one accustomed to -the stateliness and publicity of a match at Lord’s or the Oval. But -the village umpire is, perhaps, the most interesting personage on the -ground. He is usually a stout elderly man, who, grown too grey on the -head and too thick in the girth to give his side any more active help -in the field, assists in quite as efficient a manner in his new post. -He is generally a genial, jolly sort of fellow; devoted to the game, he -fondly imagines that he is an infallible judge of every point that can -arise in it, though really he is wofully ignorant of the whole subject. -He is, however, looked up to by the whole village as an authority whose -opinion cannot be disputed; probably he has once in his life, many -years ago, been to Lord’s, and has there, while watching Carpenter, -Hayward, and George Parr, laid up a store of information connected with -the play of great cricket celebrities which has sufficed ever since to -maintain his reputation as a cricket savant. - -Before the beginning of a match, he may be seen diligently rolling the -stubborn ground with a small hand-roller, in the hopes that some of -the numerous adamantine hillocks may be compressed to something like a -level with the surrounding dales and valleys. - -After this labour of love has been ineffectually bestowed he proceeds -to mark the creases. And what marvellous works of art they are when -finished! Long crooked lines, some three or four inches in thickness, -suggest that straightness and neatness have been sacrificed to the -desire of using as much whitening as possible. When it is time for the -match to begin, he marches solemnly to the wicket, with a bat over -his shoulder, chaffing and joking with the players as he goes. Then, -what numerous appeals are made to him! Catches at the wicket, l.b.w., -runs out, all follow one another in quick succession. His decisions -are always given with deliberation and evident doubt, and often are -preceded by questions to the batsman, such as, ‘Did yer ‘it it, Jack?’ -or, ‘Whereabouts did it touch ye?’ Thus the length of a man’s innings -is often in the same ratio as his moral obliquity in concealing or -perverting the truth. However, there is wonderfully little disputing, -the good-natured batsmen being quite willing to abide by the fiat of -the great authority; and if decisions are given rather more against -than for them, they are induced to keep quiet by the knowledge that -they have their own village judge at the other end, who, when the time -comes, will do his best to equalise matters. - -One of the most primitive rustic matches we ever saw was on a village -common in Hampshire. We always look back to that match as one which -produced more real fun than any we have ever taken part in. The village -umpire there, a jolly good-natured old man, but absolutely ignorant -of the laws of cricket, caused us the greatest merriment during the -whole day. In addition to his official post as umpire, he was the -village caterer at all public entertainments, and consequently supplied -luncheon at all the matches. It was evident his thoughts in the field -were divided between the responsibilities of his two duties--at least -we inferred so by his occasionally allowing the bowler to bowl as -much as ten or more balls in an over, and giving as his reason, ‘If -Mr.---- doant have a bit o’ exercise, he woant relish my steak pie. -O’im vaamous for steak pies, yer know, sir,’ he added by way of apology -for introducing the subject. This worthy old umpire gave certainly -the most astonishing decision we ever saw. A man was batting at one -end who was evidently one of the swells of his side. Owing to the -roughness and slope of the ground, the slow bowling that he had to -play was going about in all directions. Now a ball, pitching nearly -a wide to leg, would twist in and pass the wicket on the off side, -and then one pitched wide on the off would hit or pass the legs of -the batsman, who, after many wild and futile attempts to strike this, -to him, peculiar style of bowling, determined, as a last resource, -to treat it with supreme contempt. He therefore, whenever the ball -pitched wide, got in front of his stumps, turned round, and presented -the back portion of his person to the bowler. The umpire watched these -proceedings with a somewhat perplexed smile on his broad good-humoured -face, but said nothing. Shortly, a ball that pitched a couple of feet -on the leg side, twisted in, and struck the batsman on the seat of his -trousers. This caused some laughter amongst the lookers-on, and when -the mirth had subsided the umpire walked slowly a few yards down the -pitch and addressed the batsman thus: ‘Why, Jack, that ain’t cricket. -O’im a pretty favourable umpire as a rule, you know, Jack: but when a -man stops the ball with _that_, he must be out. You must go, Jack.’ -Nothing would induce the injured batsman to remain; we implored him -to stay, but no; he had been given out and was going out; and for the -rest of the day he enjoyed the importance of being an injured man--an -importance enhanced by the opinions of his admirers that, had he not -suffered an injustice, the village scorers would have had on that -occasion anything but a holiday. - -[Illustration: ‘You must go, Jack.’] - -The well-known crack player who now and then plays in village cricket -matches usually enjoys perfect immunity from the vagaries of the -village umpire; in fact, he runs only a very slight chance of ever -being out at all, unless he is palpably caught or his stumps knocked -down. The old style of umpire that we have attempted to describe is -immensely delighted at the prospect of seeing what he calls ‘real -cricket,’ and whether the ‘swell’ is on his side or against it, he -fully makes up his mind that it will be no fault of his if spectators -are not treated to an exhibition of the real article. The bowlers may -be hoarse with appealing, but the umpire remains obdurate, and it is -with real sorrow he at last sees the great man go. - -We remember on one occasion coming across a strange umpire in -Scotland. It was in a country (very country) match. The writer was -batting, and his co-partner at the other end was a well-known sporting -baronet. The latter was the continual cause of appeals both from the -bowler and wicket-keeper for l.b.w.’s and catches at the wicket. All -were answered in the batsman’s favour, much to the disgust of the -fielders. Thinking that the latter were really being treated rather -badly, the writer ventured humbly to ask the umpire whether the last -appeal (an enormous thigh right in front of all three stumps to a -straight one) had not been a very near thing. ‘Lor bless you, sir,’ was -the reply, ‘I have been his valet for fifteen years, and I dussn’t give -him out; he gets awful wild at times.’ - -A little knowledge is a dangerous thing to umpires as well as -everyone else. A ball in a country match hit the batsman’s leg, skied -up in the air, and was caught by point. ‘How’s that for leg before -wicket?’ shouted the bowler. ‘How’s that for a catch?’ said point. The -bewildered umpire had not an idea what it was, but no doubt he thought -such loud appeals meant something, and so said, ‘Out.’ ‘What for?’ -said the batsman; ‘it didn’t pitch anything like straight, wouldn’t -have hit the wicket, and what’s more, never touched it.’ ‘Out,’ said -the nonplussed umpire; ‘it hit _you below the wrist_.’ This story, -although told of an ignorant umpire, illustrates a principle which the -best umpires should have in mind, but which many of them seem never -to have learnt, or else to have forgotten, and that is, never give -your reasons for a decision. This is a golden rule for all umpires. An -umpire is engaged to say ‘Out’ or ‘Not out’ when appealed to, and not -to state the reasons which have induced his verdict. When a man adds to -his decision, ‘It didn’t pitch straight,’ ‘Your toe was up in the air,’ -‘Your bat was over the crease but not on the ground,’ it has a tendency -to create useless discussion and waste of time. Besides, an umpire may -occasionally be right in his verdict, but may be brought to grief by -explaining his reasons. For instance, suppose an appeal for a l.b.w., -and the umpire says ‘Not out.’ The wicket-keeper and the bowler may -know that the point for decision is whether the ball pitched straight -or not; the umpire adds, for example, ‘The ball would have gone over -the wicket.’ Well, this may be so, but both the wicket-keeper and the -bowler think not; if the verdict had been a decided ‘Not out,’ both of -these two would have been satisfied--a doubtful point had been given -against them, no one was to blame for it, better luck next time, &c. -&c. But since the umpire has been guilty of stating reasons, which, -according to them, are not satisfactory, he has branded himself with a -bad decision in the eyes of the fielding side. - -Some umpires--in fact, the majority of them--have a habit of putting -their hand and arm in the air and pointing to the skies when they -give a man out. A verdict propitious to the batsman is given by a -solemn ‘Not out,’ but one adverse by an annoying silence and a most -inappropriate wave of the arm in the air. It would be far more to the -purpose if the finger were pointed downwards instead of upwards, as the -batsman’s hopes are shattered. We never like to leave the wickets till -the umpire’s voice is heard. The arm may go in the air involuntarily, -or the umpire be surprised into a spasmodic upward arm-jerk; but a good -honest ‘Out’ can never be doubted. - -With regard to the qualifications that a man should possess before he -can hope to perform satisfactorily to himself and others the duties of -an umpire, the first essential is that he must have been at one time -a good cricketer. By good we do not mean first-class, or that he must -have had his name amongst the list of the best players of his time; -but he must have been fairly proficient in the game, and must have had -a large practical experience. The qualifications of a good judge are, -no doubt, of a different nature from those for a good advocate, but -before a man can sit on the Bench he must have passed through the wear -and tear of the bar, and had, when there, varied experiences in the -practice of law. So with an umpire; it does not absolutely follow that -a first-rate player will make a good umpire, but it does follow that a -man who has had great practical experience in the game will be better -qualified to decide the nice points that arise than one who has only -made cricket a theoretical study. Assuming that a man has sufficient -knowledge of the game to stand as umpire, he must possess quick and -keen sight, a good sense of hearing, powers of rapid decision, and -last, but not least, he must be very fond of cricket. The necessity of -the first two of these qualifications for good umpiring is apparent. -For most decisions a good power of sight only is required, but in -appeals for catches at the wicket an umpire has both to be guided by -his eyes and his ears. Many cases occur where the ball and the bat pass -each other with such rapidity that it is impossible for an umpire to -be certain from his eyes alone that they have touched one another, and -he must then, to a great extent, be guided by what he has heard. Both -sight and sound must help him to come to his conclusion, and he must -give no decision if it is inconsistent with the effect of either of -these senses on his mind. - -No umpire should ever be chosen to stand in first-class matches unless -he possesses the perfect use of these two senses. More than once in -important matches we have seen an umpire with his ears stuffed full -of cotton-wool. This, no doubt, was an excellent preventive against -catching cold in the head, but it was a monstrous thing to see the -result of a match of some interest depending upon the amount of sound -that could penetrate through two or three layers of wadding. - -An umpire should possess powers of quick decision, because every time -his opinion is asked he has to give it at once, and with firmness. If -he shows any signs of doubt or hesitation, he destroys the confidence -which it should be his constant endeavour to see reposed in him and his -judgment. - -An umpire has to concentrate every particle of his attention on the -game, every minute of the five or six hours he is in the field has -to be devoted to studiously watching every ball that is bowled and -every incident in the play. Once let his attention be distracted, or -his interest lessened in what is going on around him, and he will -make a mistake. The powers of concentration necessary in an umpire -are so great, and are required for such a lengthy period, that it is -impossible to find them in any man unless he is imbued with a thorough -love of cricket. It is this devotion to the game which enables our -umpires to fix their attention on it for such long weary hours, in all -conditions of weather, and in our most important matches, with such a -heavy weight of responsibility upon their shoulders. Firm, free, and -unbiassed in their judgment, our English umpires have the satisfaction -of knowing that unbounded confidence is placed in them by the players -and the public, and that never in the history of modern cricket has -there been the faintest whisper of suspicion against their integrity or -fair fame. - -And now let us discuss the actual duties of an umpire connected with -the game. The two umpires before the beginning of the match should be -present when the ground is chosen and measured. By rights, it is the -duty of the umpires actually to choose the pitch; but this is seldom -done, as so much care and attention is spent on all grounds at the -present day by the ground-men, that the wicket intended to be used has -been generally prepared with diligence for two or three days previous -to the match. They should, however, be present, and see that the ground -is the proper measurement, and that the stumps are so fixed in the -ground as to satisfy the sixth rule of the game--namely, ‘Each wicket -shall be eight inches in width, and consist of three stumps.... The -stumps shall be of equal and sufficient size to prevent the ball from -passing through, twenty-seven inches out of the ground. The bails shall -be each four inches in length, and when in position on the top of the -stumps, shall not project more than half an inch above them. Umpires -should be very careful to see that these provisions are complied with -both with regard to the width of the wicket and the ball passing -between the stumps.’ We have often seen stumps in a first-class match -so wide apart that the ball would pass between them without dislodging -the bails; over and over again have we taken hold of the ball and -passed it between them to show the umpire that the stumps were too far -apart; but we have never seen a bowled ball pass between the stumps -without removing the bails in a first-class match, though this often -happens in smaller matches. Umpires should themselves measure the -ground between the wickets; groundsmen, as a rule, do this, but they -occasionally do it in a careless and slovenly fashion, which may result -in the distance being a foot too short or too long. The slightest -difference in the usual distance of twenty-two yards from wicket -to wicket makes a great difference to the bowler, and so it should -invariably be checked by the umpires themselves using the chain. - -Before the match begins, the umpires should settle what the boundaries -are to be. This, of course, will only apply to those places where the -boundaries have not been finally settled, as at Lord’s and the Oval -and other well-known grounds. The usual practice, however, is for -the visiting team to accept the boundaries that are customary on the -ground; but should there be any dispute on this subject, it must be -settled by the umpires. Having arranged all preliminaries connected -with the pitch and the boundaries, the umpires should go to the wickets -punctually to the very minute agreed upon for beginning play. A vast -amount of time is on many grounds lost owing to unpunctuality; and if -the umpires appear on the ground at the appointed time, irrespective of -whether the players are ready or not, it has a good effect. The umpire -at the bowler’s end, when the bowling is over the wicket, should stand -as near as he can to the wicket without inconveniencing the bowler in -his action; he should stand sideways fronting the bowler, but with -his head looking over his right shoulder down the pitch. The object -of this attitude is that as small a surface of his body as possible -should be permitted to be in the line of sight of the batsman and the -ball. There are some umpires who stand as much as five or six yards -from the wicket, no doubt under the impression that so long as they -are in a straight line with the two wickets they can see everything; -but this is a mistake, as it is evident that the nearer the umpire -stands to the wicket the better he can see and judge the points that -arise for his decision. Before umpires were required to wear the long -white coats which now render them so conspicuous, their dark ones -often greatly interfered with the batsman’s view of the ball, but now -this inconvenience has been done away with, and the batsman can never -rightly complain of his sight being obscured by the umpire. - -The umpire should stand perfectly still at the moment the ball is -delivered; he must not even move his head, as any moving object -directly behind the ball, and especially as near to it as the umpire is -standing, may distract the batsman’s sight from the ball. He must watch -the bowler’s hindmost foot to see if it touch or cross the bowling -crease, in which case it is a ‘no ball,’ and must almost at the same -time watch the bowler’s hand and arm to guard against any infringement -of the rule against throwing. - -The rule with regard to ‘no balls’ is, ‘The bowler shall deliver the -ball with one foot on the ground behind the bowling crease, and within -the return crease, otherwise the umpire shall call no ball.’ The umpire -must, therefore, call ‘no ball’ if the hindmost foot of the bowler is, -at the moment of delivery, even touching the bowling or return creases. -This rule makes it important that the bowling crease should be neatly -and correctly marked. The rule with regard to the bowling crease says -that it ‘shall be in a line with the stumps, 6 ft. 8 in. in length, -&c.,’ but says nothing about the width of it. We must, therefore, infer -from the words ‘in a line’ that the bowling crease should not be of -greater width than the thickness of the stumps. If it is drawn of this -thickness only, it is a very narrow line, but is correct according to -a common-sense interpretation of the rules 7 and 11; for supposing, as -is often the case, the crease is thicker than the width of the stumps, -it would then be a manifest injustice to ‘no ball’ a bowler because -his hindmost foot has just touched the edge of it. These two rules -evidently mean that the hindmost foot shall be behind the line of the -wicket when the ball is delivered. If the crease is too thick, the foot -may just touch it and yet not transgress the spirit of the two rules -taken together. - -With regard to the necessity, laid down in rule 11, for the hindmost -foot to be on the ground ... when the ball is delivered, we think -umpires may take it as settled that it is quite an impossibility for a -bowler to deliver a ball with this foot off the ground. Let anyone try -to bowl with only the left foot on the ground, and he will at once see -the practical impossibility of doing so. A ‘no ball’ should be called -quickly and distinctly directly the ball has been delivered; an umpire -must not shout ‘No ball’ as soon as he sees the foot touch or overlap -the crease, but must wait till the ball is actually bowled; otherwise -he may land himself in a difficulty should the bowler stop and not -deliver the ball. We remember an umpire, who is generally supposed to -be about the best in England, making this mistake in 1886; he called -a ‘no ball’ so very prematurely that it gave the bowler time to stop -before the ball left his hand. - -A wide ball is one that, in the opinion of the umpire, is not within -reach of the striker. It therefore does not make the slightest -difference where it pitches so long as, in the umpire’s opinion, it -has _never been_ within the batsman’s reach. Some people entertain -the idea that if a ball has pitched fairly straight but afterwards -twisted beyond the batsman’s reach, it should not be called wide; but -this is wrong, as the rule says positively that ‘if it is not within -reach of the striker, the umpire shall call “wide ball.”’ It is often -a very nice point as to what is or is not within reach of the striker, -and umpires’ opinions vary on this head. We think the true reading of -the rule is that, on the off side, the batsman’s reach should not be -limited to what he can only reach when standing still in his original -position, but should be extended to what he can conveniently and -comfortably reach with either leg across his wicket, say for ‘cutting’ -or ‘off driving.’ On the leg side we think a ball should be called -‘wide’ if the batsman in the ordinary swing of the arms and bat for a -leg hit could not reach it.[32] It thus follows, that a ball may be a -‘wide’ on the leg side which would not be one if at an equal distance -from the batsman on the off side. If the ball passes so high over the -batsman as to be out of his reach, it is a ‘wide.’ This very rarely -occurs, but umpires should remember that if the batsman can touch this -ball by holding the bat in the air, it is not a ‘wide.’ It does not -follow that it is a ‘wide’ because the ball goes over the head of the -batsman without being played at--most batsmen refuse to strike at such -a ball because of the attendant risk--but it must be so high that the -batsman cannot reach it when holding the bat in the usual manner. - -When the bowler is bowling round the wicket the umpire should stand -exactly in the same place as he does for ‘over the wicket’ bowling, but -should of course front the bowler’s side of the wicket. He should be -watchful to see that the bowler keeps within the limit of the return -crease; if he touches this with his hindmost foot, it is a ‘no ball’ -and should be instantly ‘called.’ Round-the-wicket bowlers often have -a tendency to bowl as far as possible round the wicket, and as this is -done with the object of making their bowling more difficult, umpires -should be careful to keep them within the prescribed limits. There is -rather a slackness in many umpires about calling ‘no ball’ because the -return crease is touched; but they ought to be quite as particular in -this respect as in the case of the bowling crease--in fact, even more -so, as a ball delivered an extra inch from the line between wicket and -wicket makes more difference to the batsman than one delivered an inch -nearer than usual. - -The principal duties of the umpire at the bowler’s end are those -we have discussed--viz. calling ‘wides’ and ‘no balls,’ answering -decisions for leg before wicket and catches at the wicket--and there -are some few other points he may occasionally be called upon to decide. -Before mentioning these, let us see what the laws say with regard to -the several duties of the two umpires. Law 47 says, ‘The umpire at the -bowler’s wicket shall be appealed to before the other umpire in all -cases except in those of stumping, hit wicket, run out at the striker’s -wicket, or arising out of law 42 (the law relating to any part of the -wicket-keeper’s person being in front of the wicket, or to his taking -the ball before it reaches the wicket); but in any case in which an -umpire is unable to give a decision, he shall appeal to the other -umpire, whose decision shall be final.’ It will thus be seen that the -umpire at the bowler’s end must be appealed to first in all but the -excepted cases; he therefore has to decide all questions relating to -catches; but if he is uncertain, or from some cause has been prevented -from seeing the circumstances of the catch, he may appeal to the other -umpire, whose decision shall be final. It is sometimes a very difficult -thing for an umpire to be certain whether or not the fielder’s hands -have got under the ball before it has touched the ground; if he is -at all doubtful, he should at once appeal to the other umpire, whose -position may probably have enabled him to get a better view of the -‘catch.’ A difficulty occasionally arises in connection with what is -commonly called a ‘bump’ ball. A bump ball is one which the batsman, -playing hard on to the ground and close to the bat, causes to bound -in the air. Should it be caught by a fielder, a question often arises -whether it touched the ground after the bat or not. Sometimes these -decisions are hard to arrive at with certainty, and especially so if -the ground is dry and dusty and the batsman in striking stirs up a -cloud of dust, as the actual contact between the bat and the ball is -then partially, if not altogether, obscured from the umpire’s view. -Perhaps the most historical decision on this point is one that was -given in the University match of 1881. C. F. H. Leslie, the well-known -old Rugbeian, had just begun his innings; A. F. J. Ford was bowling. -Leslie made a half-hit at a well-pitched-up ball, and raised a cloud of -dust around him; the ball came straight back to the bowler, who caught -it, and Leslie instantly left his wicket for the pavilion, evidently -under the impression that he was fairly out. Before he had reached the -entrance of the pavilion circumstances arose which caused the other -batsman then at the wickets to appeal to the bowler’s umpire for a -decision as to whether the catch had been made off a ‘bump’ ball or -not. This umpire, not being able to give a decision, appealed to the -other one, who, after some discussion with his colleague, decided in -the affirmative, and consequently Leslie resumed his innings. - -When an umpire has to decide the question of a ‘bump’ ball or not, he -must be guided by its length, its flight from the bat, and the way in -which the latter has been used; the state of the ground sometimes must -be considered, as it is unlikely, when the turf is in a soft, spongy -state, that a ball will bounce high or far from it. - -As will be seen by the latter part of law 47 (just quoted), the -bowler’s umpire may occasionally be appealed to on matters which are -primarily in the discretion of his colleague. If the latter cannot -decide, for instance, a question of stumping, which, by the law, must -first be referred to him, he may appeal to the bowler’s umpire. This -power of appealing in cases of stumping is rarely used--in fact, we -have never seen or heard of a single case of its exercise, though we -once saw a case arise in which an appeal might very rightly have been -made. In the University match of 1878, A. H. Evans was batting, he ran -out to a slow, hit at it with all his might, missed it, and let the bat -slip out of his hands. The ball was taken, and the wicket put down by -the Cambridge wicket-keeper, Alfred Lyttelton; but the umpire had seen -the bat flying straight at his head, and not wishing to risk a broken -crown by sticking to his post, had fallen down with his head averted -from the wicket, and was consequently unable to give a decision on a -case which he had not seen. Evans was some three or four feet out of -his ground when the bails were knocked off, but as no decision was -given against him he of course remained at the wickets. This is exactly -the case which this part of rule 47 is framed to meet; the other umpire -would have been quite able to have given a decision on a plain case -like this, and no doubt would have done so had there been an appeal -made to him. - -Under law 43 many points arise for the decision of the bowler’s -umpire, two of which merit discussion here. This law says, ‘_The -umpires are the sole judges of fair and unfair play_, of the fitness -of the ground, the weather, and the light for play; all disputes shall -be determined by them, and if they disagree the actual state of things -shall continue.’ But law 46 says, ‘They (the umpires) shall not order -a batsman out unless appealed to by the other side.’ So that no umpire -can really decide anything, except wides, no balls, and boundary hits, -unless an appeal is made to him. As will be seen from law 43, appeals -may be made on the fairness or otherwise of the play. These appeals -happily are seldom made, but circumstances may arise in which it is the -duty of the umpire to give his opinion under this rule. For instance, -should the bowler so cut up the pitch with his feet as to place the -batsman at a disadvantage when opposed to the bowling from the other -end, it would be the duty of the umpire, if appealed to, to say that -such tearing or cutting up was unfair, whether done accidentally or -not. When the Hon. Ivo Bligh’s team was in Australia in 1882–3, an -appeal was made to the umpire by one of this team as to whether the way -in which Spofforth was cutting up the wicket was fair or unfair. There -was no doubt the wicket was being seriously damaged; the appealing -batsman of course made no imputation of intentional unfairness against -Spofforth, but only asked for a decision whether such damage was fair -to the batting side. The umpire asked to see the soles of Spofforth’s -shoes; these were held up for public view, and as they only had about -one spike each, it was decided that there was nothing unfair. It, is, -however, a well-known fact that when ground is cut up, it is done by -the force with which the boot is brought on to the ground; the edge of -the sole is often answerable for the damage, and the number of spikes -that are worn is quite beside the question. - -As we have before noted, the umpire at the striker’s end has to -decide some few points; his duties, however, are not nearly so onerous -as those of his colleague at the other end. They are decisions on -stumping, hitting wicket, running out, and matters arising under law -42. This umpire should stand quite square with the wicket, so near -as to enable him to see accurately all that happens without placing -himself in any risk from a hard square hit. He should take care that -the popping crease is clearly visible to him: if it has got worn out -and difficult to see, a pinch of sawdust placed at the end of it will -give him its correct line. It is always best, however, when either of -the creases has become indistinct to send for the whitening and re-mark -it. Stumping rarely gives much difficulty to the umpire; his position -is such that he ought always to be able to see whether the bails are -off before the bat or foot are within the line. If the toe of the -batsman is on the crease and _no part of his foot within it_, of course -the decision must be against the batsman. If the batsman relies on -his bat being in his ground when the bails are off, the umpire should -recollect that the bat must be _in his hand_ according to law 19. We -recollect once seeing in a county match a batsman after a tremendous -futile swipe fall prostrate outside his ground with the force of the -unsuccessful stroke; he was lying some two feet out of his ground, and -his bat was within the crease with the handle resting on his shoulder -when the wicket was put down. The umpire wrongly gave him ‘not out,’ no -doubt thinking he was justified in doing so as the bat was connected -with a portion of the batsman’s body. The bat must, however, be in his -hand to prevent a decision against him, unless ‘some part of his person -be grounded within the line of the popping crease.’ - -It is generally easy for an umpire to see when a batsman hits his -wickets. The ball is usually played by the bat, but the batsman coming -further back than usual, either from a mistake in his judgment as to -the pitch or from originally standing too near, strikes the wicket. -An umpire, however, must keep a sharp look on the wicket-keeper’s -feet and hands, and see that the fall of the bails is not due to -any of these coming in contact with the wicket. It is possible for -a wicket-keeper to dislodge the bails with the tip of his gloves or -the point of his boot, and yet be unconscious that he has done so. An -umpire must also keep his eyes open to guard against any chance of this -being intentionally done. Fortunately there is now no ‘hanky-panky’ -play in our first-class cricket; but there have undoubtedly been cases -where a smart wicket-keeper has been unable to resist the temptation -of removing the bail with foot or glove when in the act of taking the -ball. If any part of the batsman’s person hits the wicket ‘in playing -at the ball,’ it is sufficient to justify a decision against him. If -his hat blow off and knock the bails off when he is in the act of -playing, he is out; several instances are on record of this unfortunate -method of dismissal. In the season of 1886 there was an instance -recorded of a man knocking one of his bails off with a piece of the -string that had been wrapped round the blade of his bat; he was, of -course, given out. A difficulty sometimes arises as to whether the bail -was knocked off in the actual stroke at the ball, or whether it was in -the action of the bat preliminary or subsequent to the stroke. - -[Illustration: Stumped.] - -The duties of umpires are so various, and the decisions they are -called upon to give are so numerous, that it is an impossibility to -discuss them all. Every umpire should remember that when an unforeseen -incident occurs in the game he must use his common sense for its -solution, and then he will not go far wrong. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[32] A batsman’s reach is further on the off than the leg side, because -he has his legs to put across the wicket to help him on the former side. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -FIELDING.[33] - -(BY THE HON. R. H. LYTTELTON.) - - -[Illustration: ‘Saving the four.’] - -Certain natural qualifications are indispensable to enable any -cricketer to become a great fieldsman. The highest reputation that can -be attained by any painstaking cricketer who is not endowed with these -qualifications is that of being a good safe man. When you hear this -epithet, you may take it for granted that reference is made to a man -who may cover himself with glory if he has to field a ball within a -certain more or less limited space from the spot where he has taken his -position, who is generally in the habit of holding a feasible catch, -and who will seldom disgrace himself. - -In other words, a safe field is generally a slow one, is lacking in -electricity and rapidity of movement, and, as batsmen get to know this, -the short run is attempted with impunity. Slow fields are earnestly -advised to practise throwing; for their defects are less apparent -when fielding a long distance from the wicket, and the non-observant -spectator does not notice that the ground covered at a distance from -the wicket by a slow field is very small compared to that commanded by -some space-covering field like Palairet, Sugg, or J. Douglas. - -Again, let safe and slow fields, the roadsters among the thoroughbreds, -try and get a respectable knowledge of the game; for if they obtain -this they can in a great measure discount their deficiencies. A good -judge of the game gets to know by instinct where a batsman is likely -to hit certain balls, and so does the observant fieldsman. He will -consequently shift a few yards or so from his original position to -the spot towards which his instinct tells him the ball is likely to -be hit; and he will thereby earn the enviable reputation of being a -man who is frequently in the right place. It used to be said of the -immortal French tennis player, Barre, that he himself did not run after -the ball, but the ball ran after him; his genius told him where his -opponent was going to hit the ball, and he planted himself accordingly. -In like manner will a fieldsman so plant himself; and it is important -to a slow field to try and acquire this instinct, for if the fieldsman -is not on a certain spot of ground before the hit is made, his slowness -will prevent his getting there afterwards, especially if the hit is -hard and the ground fast. - -Directions may now be given on the knotty points, ‘Where ought I to -stand?’ ‘When ought I to back up?’ ‘Which end ought I to throw to?’ -and a few others; for this reason, that many a good fieldsman might be -better if he knew where to place himself and precisely what to do. - -First, then, it may be safely asserted that a concentrated attention on -every ball is a _sine quâ non_ of even decent fielding. Men often think -that if they are simply looking at the batsman they are doing all that -is required. But this is not so. There is a difference of opinion as -to whether the eyes should be fixed on the batsman, or should follow -the ball as it leaves the bowler’s arm; this is a matter of dispute, -our own opinion being in favour of the former plan. But each man should -stand as if the next ball were sure to come to him, not only as if it -might come to him. One can see a whole eleven doing it now and then -when there are (say) six runs wanted to tie and seven to win. They -are all adopting for a few minutes the position they ought to adopt -always--in short, the position in which great fieldsmen like Wainwright -and Burnup are found invariably. We will first take a few general -points, and then the separate places in the field. - - -BACKING UP. - -[Illustration: Backing up.] - -This is a matter which demands the earnest consideration of all who -field within thirty yards of the wicket. There ought always to be -two men backing up; never more. Nine times out of ten they will be -superfluous, but the tenth time they will save a ‘four overthrow,’ and -all the chagrin, demoralisation, and tearing of hair connected with -that disaster. No fieldsman can throw his best unless he is confident -about the backing up, and the man who ought to be abused when an -overthrow occurs is not the fieldsman who throws the ball, but the men -who should be backing up and are not. Again--and let young fields take -heed to this--there must be ten yards between the two men backing up, -and also between the one nearest the wicket and the wicket. This gives -them room to stop the wildest throw, but does not give the batsmen -time to run if the ball passes the wicket. If the fields stand close -together, two are as bad as none, and get in each other’s way. Rules -for the different fields we give in dealing with them separately. - - -THROWING. - -This is, of course, a gift of nature, not a result of art. Few -men can throw far, but everyone can throw quickly, and that is what -prevents batsmen from running. There is a moment which decides a -batsman whether he can manage to secure another run or not. It is -just when a fieldsman, having run some way after the ball, and having -his back turned to the wicket, is stooping to pick up preparatory to -throwing in. Now any good judge of running, after seeing a man go -through this process once, knows exactly how long it will take. Every -nerve should be strained to make it as brief as possible: a little -extra sign of life and rapid movement will make the batsman hesitate -a moment, and the run is lost. The engraving on p. 245 shows what in -our opinion is the proper way to pick up a ball going away. The field -is not trying to catch the ball up as far as his feet are concerned. -He is stretching his hand forward to pick it up, and when he has got -it into his hand he will throw it rather over his left shoulder to the -wicket. Again, supposing a run is being snatched. The field should -then remember that to throw in slowly is of no possible use. The throw -may be, in other respects, as perfect and as straight as Robin Hood’s -arrow, but the batsman will be safe over the crease, and such a throw -becomes an example of showy drawing-room cricket, which is sure to be -applauded by the spectators, as well as the reporters, but is useless -to the side. If every field picked up and threw in as quickly as his -knee joints and the state of his arm allowed him, a very considerable -percentage of the runs usually scored would be saved. It is commonly -asserted by many of those supporters of the game who, having laid down -their arms, devote themselves for the rest of their lives to laying -down the law, that nobody ought ever to throw down the wicket. This is -certainly wrong. We do not mean that everybody ought always to throw -at the wicket, but only that some fields, under certain circumstances, -ought to do so. These circumstances occur when it is the only chance of -running a man out. The ball should be hurled violently at the bails, -and if an overthrow occurs, the wise captain will abuse those who -ought to be backing up, and not the thrower. But to throw hard at the -wicket when there is no chance of running a man out is strongly to be -condemned; it may produce an overthrow, and it is certain to inflict -useless concussion on the hands of bowlers and wicket-keepers. No -fieldsman is so apt to disregard this advice as the bowler; at least, -it is a fact that many bowlers are particularly fond of returning the -ball hard to the wicket after they have fielded it. It does not succeed -in running a man out once in a thousand times, it often enables a run -to be got by an overthrow, and it uselessly troubles the wicket-keeper. -A batsman is next door to an idiot who is got out by such means, and we -suspect that it is often done to secure the applause of an unthinking -mob. - -[Illustration: ‘Overtaking and picking up.’] - - -DEEP FIELD, OR COUNTRY CATCHING. - -This is an art which the above-mentioned critics lament as having -died out. It may be suspected that they missed as many catches as -the present generation, but still the present generation miss more -than they ought. All fine country fields catch the ball close to the -body--nay, more close to the head--and rightly so, because the eye is -more in a line with the ball, and with the hands in the position shown -in fig. 1, not in the way shown in fig. 2. If a young player begins in -the wrong way, he will miss one or two and get nervous. It is worth -remembering that folios of rules will never make a nervous field keep -hold of a country catch. Cold hands are a frequent cause of failure, -but loss of confidence and the disorganisation of the nervous system is -the commonest reason, and a constant prayer of many a cricketer is to -be spared a high catch. - -[Illustration: FIG. 1.--The right way to catch.] - -When a field begins to be uncertain, he should keep wicket to fast -bowling for a quarter of an hour a day, and field somewhere close -in for a week or so. The wicket-keeping will practise his eye, and -the fielding close in will spare his nerves during this educational -process. Practice is, of course, useful for long catches, but only up -to a certain point. A player may alter from a bad style of catching to -a good one by practice, but a very safe catch in practice is frequently -a bad performer in a match, simply on account of nervousness. For sharp -catches, wicket-keeping is, perhaps, the only thing that will help. The -peculiar faculty they demand is, like the spin in bowling, something -that cannot be taught, the possession of which is a guarantee of genius. - -[Illustration: FIG. 2.--The wrong way to catch.] - -And now for those who occupy the separate places, first among whom we -are surely right in dealing with the - - -WICKET-KEEPER. - -A little thought makes it clear that there are given at least -three chances of catching to one of stumping a man out. And so the -wicket-keeper must first feel the ball safe and warm in his hands -before he attempts to put the wicket down. This advice sounds obvious, -but it is so often disregarded that it must be insisted on. The first -rule accordingly is, that the ball must not be snatched at, but -received. This snapping used to be a very common fault with amateurs, -and the great George Pinder’s remark, ‘You amateurs snap ’em a bit,’ -hit on a then weak spot in amateur wicket-keeping. Another reason for -not snapping is one that will certainly strike home, and that is, -that the non-snapper is not nearly so likely to hurt his hands, as -one form of snapping consists in jerking the hands quickly forward to -meet the ball, and thereby resisting a blow instead of waiting for it. -Another danger of snapping is, that you run the risk of moving your -hands in such a way that instead of the ball striking the palms of the -hands where it does not hurt, it strikes you on the top of the thumb -or fingers, causing an agony that only wicket-keepers can rightly -appreciate. Hardly any two wicket-keepers stand alike, so take any -position that is natural to you, as was recommended in the chapter on -Batting, only bearing one fact in mind, which is, to avoid standing -so far away as not to be able comfortably to put down the wicket -without moving the legs. The postures generally assumed are, it must -be confessed, the reverse of graceful; they are too well known to need -description, but the two most common forms are shown in the figures -given on pp. 252 and 254. In one figure we recognise the massive -proportions of the famous Sherwin. It is wise to teach the beginner -to stand still and not to move his feet till the ball is hit by the -batsman or has passed his hands or is in his hands. We say beginners -because some famous wicket-keepers do move right in front of the ball, -but if a beginner moves his feet it may be inferred that he funks the -ball, and is getting out of its way. Again, you may not be able to -take many leg-balls, but every time you do put the wicket down, not -regarding the fact that the batsman may not be out of his ground. If -you wait to look, he certainly will not wait to get back, warned as -he is by the sound of the ball impinging on the gloves that there is -no time for loitering about. We do not say that an appeal ought to be -made to the umpire every time that the wicket is put down; that ought -only to be done when you think that the batsman was out of his ground; -unless this is the case it is an unfair and unsportsmanlike proceeding. - -[Illustration: Wicket-keeper--Sherwin in position.] - -We have before protested against pandering to the vicious tastes -of the gallery, and we must protest against it again, and caution -wicket-keepers in the following particular. It is supremely difficult -to take leg-balls, and the populace applaud accordingly when one is -taken. Now we have no objection to a wicket-keeper taking as many -leg-balls as possible, but on one condition, and that is, that he does -not lay himself out to take leg-balls at the expense of the off balls. -It is easy to do this by a different position and a concentration of -thought on the leg-balls. The vast majority of catches are given on the -off side, and catches, as has been before remarked, out-number stumping -chances in the proportion of 3 to 1. We would infinitely sooner have -a wicket-keeper on our side who was safe on the off side and did not -take one leg-ball in a hundred, limiting leg-balls to those outside the -legs of the batsman. Let your first thoughts be concentrated mainly on -straight and off-side balls, and pay no regard to the applause of any -save those whose knowledge of the game makes their approbation valuable. - -[Illustration: Wicket-keeper--Another position.] - -A player with no aptitude for wicket-keeping on first going to that -position will undergo moments of unspeakable agony. Spectators do not -thoroughly realise the position of the wicket-keeper, indeed nobody -can who has not attempted the art. In the first place, we will suppose -a very fast bowler; in the second, a fast and possibly a rather bumpy -wicket; in the third place, a batsman with perhaps the bulk of W. -G. Grace or K. J. Key, wielding a bat of the orthodox proportions; -and in the fourth place, three stumps with two bails placed on the -top. The body of the batsman in many cases completely obstructs the -view the wicket-keeper ought to have of the ball. Even if he can get -a good sight of the ball there is that abominable bat being fiddled -about, baulking the eyesight in the most tantalising manner, and -there are some batsmen who have a provoking habit of waving their -bats directly the bowler begins his run, and continuing their antics -till the ball is right up to them; while others seem to be built like -windmills, and have a limb always at hand to throw out between the -unhappy wicket-keeper and the rapidly-advancing ball. There are several -seconds, therefore, when the wicket-keeper is only conjecturing what -course the ball is taking, and is certain of but two things--one, that -the ball is hard; the other, that it is advancing in the direction -of himself with terrific rapidity. Then, even if you see the ball -plainly, it may happen to be, and frequently is, straight, and a -straight fast ball raises unutterable emotions in the wicket-keeper’s -breast; for who knows what devilish tricks the ball, to say nothing -of the bails, will play after the wicket is struck, and the course of -the missile diverted, not stopped? One reads how a bail has been sent -a distance of thirty or forty yards by a fast ball, and that bail may -take the wicket-keeper in the eye _in transitu_. The writer was once -struck by the ball on the eye and by the bail on the mouth at very -nearly the same second. The wicket-keeper is grimly told that he must -not flinch, and that he never can be really good if he does not keep -his legs still. True, most true; but, like other great people who do -great things, he must resist every natural impulse and all his lower -nature, and not till he has succeeded will he stand the least chance -of reaching to a pinnacle of excellence. Having briefly pointed out -these difficulties and dangers, let us beg the field to treat the -wicket-keeper as tenderly as possible, to cultivate a straight throw, -either a catch or a long-hop, and not half-volleys or, worse still, -short-hops, and never to throw hard when there is no necessity. If the -throw is crooked, the wicket-keeper should not leave his position to -stop it; leave that to the men who are backing up. He may be called -upon afterwards to put down the wicket, and he ought to be in a -position for so doing. Bear in mind also this cardinal rule--namely, to -stand behind the wicket to a throw and not in front. - - -LONG-LEG. - -[Illustration: Hit to square-leg.] - -It may be stated first of all in regard to this place, that its -importance is very considerably less in the cricket of the present -day than it was in former times. The improvement of bowling in mere -accuracy, owing to the fact that now compared with twenty years ago -five medium pace and slow bowlers exist to one fast bowler, is the -reason of this change; and even when a long-leg is used, it is very -often because a sort of back-up is required for the wicket-keeper, and -the long-leg is consequently placed very sharp, always remembering -that there is no long-stop. The man chosen for this grand post ought -to know from the way a batsman hits at a ball whether he should stand -square or sharp. The old-fashioned long-leg hitting of George Parr is -almost a thing of the past; so that long-leg should stand too square -rather than too sharp, especially as the right hand will thus get most -to do. If the batsman is a weak hitter, alter the position, moving not -only nearer the wicket but sharper as well. For a weak hitter’s most -dangerous stroke will be a snick to leg, and it is rather galling to -see a snick score many runs. But a strong square-leg hit is far more -dangerous; therefore, leave ample space to cover the ground, and trust -to your speed to save two runs. A good runner, after he plays a ball -gently to long-leg, makes all haste over the first run, and, as he -turns, assumes that there is time for the second if he sees that the -long-leg is slackening in the least, or winding up for an ornamental -throw, or in any other way wasting time. In such case jump towards -the ball the moment you see the batsman turning round to slide it in -your direction; run as if a mad bull were behind you, and picking up -the ball with one hand (as it is moving slowly enough) hurl it at the -wicket-keeper’s head--unless he is some distance off, in which case -throw so that it goes to the wicket-keeper a long-hop. Occasionally it -is useful to throw to the bowler, assuming that he is behind the stumps -and that mid-off is backing up, because the batsmen get frightened at -this manœuvre, and feel that their second run entails too much of a -risk, and this frequently prevents them trying it again. Bear in mind -that the aim of good fielding is, not to run men out, but to prevent -their trying to run. Remember also that a catch to long-leg has a -tendency to curl towards your right hand, so do not rush too violently -towards the left directly the ball is hit. - - -MID-OFF AND MID-ON - -have somewhat similar duties to perform, and the latter in one way -is the easiest place in the field, for there is less twist on the -ball when hit there than is the case with any other hit. When the -ground is hard, stand deeper than when it is soft, because on a hard -ground a single is easier, a four harder, to save. Again, stand wider -when the bowler is bowling your side of the wicket, as he is then -responsible for part of the space between you. If the batsman is a -timid runner, it is a good plan to tempt him to run by pretending to -be slow, and the moment he calls ‘run’ dash in with unexpected vigour. -This artifice, however, can be useful only once in an innings, and -must not be attempted by any except quick and good fields. But if by -well-ascertained and true report and your own observation you know that -either or both of the batsmen are slow or timid runners, stand further -back, unless there is any special reason to make you stand in for a -catch, for by so doing you cover more ground and can save fourers or -threes. Mid-off must back up behind the bowler when the ball is thrown -in from long-leg, short-leg, mid-on and long-stop. Mid-on backs up the -bowler when it is thrown from mid-off, cover-point, point, and third -man. Modern tactics and modern slow bowling have invented an extra -field in the shape of an extra mid-off, who stands between cover-point -and mid-off, and his duties, when the fashion is to bowl mainly on the -off side for catches, are most onerous. Mr. G. B. Studd’s fielding -here was one of the sights of cricket. The Australians in general, and -Boyle in particular, have introduced a new position to bowlers of the -Spofforth type--you may call it either an extra short-leg or an extra -mid-on. If the wicket is soft and catchy this field stands sometimes -only five or six yards from the bat, and makes numerous catches when -batsmen are poking forward and the ball is inclined to hang. In short, -it is on the on side that which ‘silly point’--afterwards described--is -on the off side. It will only be seen when bowlers of superlative -excellence are bowling, men who can be relied upon to keep a good -length, and whose bowling is too fast to allow the batsman to run -out for a drive. If the bowler has not these qualities, but bowls a -decent average of half-volleys on the leg-stump or a little outside, -there will probably be a coroner’s inquest required. But Boyle knew -that neither Spofforth nor Palmer bowled such balls, and it cramps the -batsman unpleasantly to see a field standing there on a tricky wicket. -Extreme vigilance is required for this post, and the risk of injury is -too great to permit it being made use of when the wicket is fast. It -was practically never seen in England till the Australians introduced -it in 1878. - - -COVER-POINT - -shares with the three last-mentioned fields a great responsibility -connected with throwing and running fast after the ball. A very -common set of strokes are those which send the ball on either side of -cover-point, mid-off, extra mid-off or mid-on, and realise on a hard -ground three runs. Now a really good field very seldom allows three -runs, because he makes the batsmen suppose that the ball is somehow -back at the wicket almost at the same moment that he is seen picking -it up from the ground. Those who have tried this will testify how -very often a sudden turn and throw-in just checks the third run; the -batsmen feel that they must watch such a field, and it is this very -watching which prevents them from ever pressing the running. This is -a most important matter and one generally neglected, but it is worth -insisting on, because anybody can act upon this piece of advice. Anyone -can run his fastest and throw his quickest, but the men who field in -these places seldom do their best, though the man who does not is not a -genuine cricketer, and is probably a selfish animal. Such conscientious -fielding as this gets very little recognition, though it saves about -one in every ten runs. Spectators do not observe; the cricket reporters -notice the features of the game that are obvious to only ignorant -spectators, and they do not waste ink upon it; but any really judicious -captain estimates it very highly. No doubt a flashy field is very -useful at cover-point; he cramps all the runs on the off side, and -covers the defects of a third-rate mid-off; but very often these are -just the men who shirk the burden, heat and hard work of the day, as -we may call these repeated excursions of fifty yards or so under a -strong sun. Cover-point should learn, if possible, the under-hand throw -practised with such success by the late Rev. W. Law and G. J. Mordaunt. -He has to back up behind mid-off when mid-on or the deep-on fields are -throwing in, and behind point when short-leg and long-leg throw to the -wicket-keeper. - - -POINT. - -Success in this place depends almost entirely on natural gifts, and -there are two distinctly different methods of first-class fielding -in this place. One is the point, who seems nearly to have solved the -problem of perpetual motion, and bounds about everywhere, rushing in at -one ball and right in front of the wicket to the next, but whose first -position is closer in than more stationary fields at the same place. -The other variety of point stands a yard or two further from the wicket -and is more stationary, and his specialty consists in being a grabber -of every ball within his reach. The right way of standing is shown -in the figure opposite. There are plenty of good fields at point who -stand differently from this, but we are trying to teach those who are -not good fields, and we think that this figure is a good position. The -important point to observe is that you can move quicker when one foot -is drawn a little behind the other, and Carpenter and other good fields -used always to stand thus. Some critics would say that point ought to -stoop more, and no doubt some good points do. Each must choose his own -elevation as far as this goes, but we feel sure that a great many balls -go over the point’s head when he stoops very much, and that on the -whole the figure shows the best stoop. The stationary and the restless -both have their merits and both have their characteristics. The tall -man with a long reach nearly always adopts the stationary position, and -no hit is too hard for him to face. Of course he ought to stand ready -to start quickly, but his business consists in covering as much ground -as possible from very nearly one position, and he must have a good -aptitude for getting his hand in the right place to stop the ball. - -[Illustration: Point.] - -The position of point ought to be in a line with the wicket, and at a -distance depending entirely on the pace of bowler, style of batsman, -and condition of ground. The faster the bowler and the ground, the -further off the wicket ought point to stand, but in no case ought he -to be more than eight yards away. Some points make a great mistake in -standing further than this, for a very common catch at point is when -a bumping ball rises off the batsman’s glove and pitches about four -yards from the wicket in the direction of point--a certain catch if -point is fielding in his right place, but impossible to get at if he -stands too far from the wicket. There is no limit on certain grounds -and to certain batsmen to the closeness to the wicket which an active -point will stand. The ball has been taken literally almost off the -bat. We think, on the whole, that the fieldsman who stands nearly in -the same position till the ball is hit, who is quick in starting, and -very sure and ready to face and stop a real ‘hot-un,’ is more valuable -than the restless point who runs here and there, and rarely adopts the -same position for two consecutive balls. There is, however, much to be -said for both styles; but we feel very sure that the restless point -must first acquire a certain faculty of more or less correctly judging -where the batsman is likely to hit the ball, or else he will be always -rushing to the wrong place. - -There is a combination of circumstances which induces modern captains -to put their point right forward on the off side about eight yards from -the wicket. The circumstances required include a batsman who has got a -peculiar forward style, a bowler whose balls are inclined to hang or -get up straight from the pitch, and lastly a catchy wicket where the -balls are apt to bump and hang. It is a very useful place sometimes, -but most dangerous to the field at other times. In the Australian and -England match at the Oval in 1880, Morley was bowling, McDonnell was -batting. The ball now and then bumped up, and the English captain -acceded to W. G. Grace’s wish and allowed him to go forward point, or, -as it is familiarly called, ‘silly’ point. Now McDonnell is one of the -hardest hitters in the world, and Morley used sometimes to bowl a ball -a little over-tossed. A ball of a certain length _might_ have been -bowled that McDonnell _might_ not have smothered at the pitch, and the -requisite hang having taken place, W. G. Grace _might_ have triumphed. -But unfortunately, before this consummation took place, McDonnell got -a ball admirably adapted to his extremely powerful off drive. The -well-known musical sound of a bat hitting the ball plump was heard, -then a second knock higher in its musical pitch and nearly as loud, -the ball was seen about twenty yards high in the air, and McDonnell -easily scored a run. What really happened was this: McDonnell made a -grand hit all along the ground, and long before the burly form of W. G. -Grace had unbent itself, the aforesaid ball had struck his toe, which -offered a strictly passive, because involuntary, resistance, with such -violence that the ball ascended into the air like a rocket, and a run -was the result. W. G. walked slowly, a wiser man, to his old position -on a line with the wicket, and probably in his inmost thought silently -adopted the opinion that the position of ‘silly point’ is only feasible -when a batsman of a style directly opposite to that of McDonnell is at -the wicket. But this forward point is very useful at times, and should -be made use of when circumstances are favourable. The late Mr. R. A. -Fitzgerald, in his well-known book ‘Jerks in from Short-leg,’ says that -if there is no good field at point in an eleven, the captain should -choose the fattest man, for nature makes it impossible for him to get -out of the way of a hard hit. In other words, it sometimes strikes him -in the most prominent part of his person and saves four runs. Perhaps -Roger Iddison, of Yorkshire fame, who died in the year 1890, could have -testified to the truth of this remark, and perhaps Mr. Key will take to -the position in the maturity of his cricket life. - - -SHORT-SLIP - -ought first of all to be as vigilant as if he were keeping wicket. If -he is so, and knows where to stand, he will find it the easiest place -in the field; if he is not, it will be the hardest. Wicket-keepers -ought always to be able to field short-slip, for it is a post that has -all the pleasant moments of wicket-keeping with none of the knocks -and bruises and other discomforts of that important place. Stoop as -the ball is in the air, and hold the hands ready forward, as shown in -figure on p. 264. This position is necessary because many more balls -hiss low along the grass than rise into the air from a snick, and if -they do rise short-slip can rise too and be in time for them; but if he -has to stoop he will be too late. So for fast bowling stand finer than -most short-slips do, and if the ground is very hard keep a long way -off--eight yards is often not too long a distance. But the difficulty -in this respect is much greater when the bowling is slow. A late cut -adds materially to the speed of a slow ball, though it has scarcely -any effect on a fast one. But if, instead of cutting, a batsman plays -forward and snicks a slow ball, a gentle catch comes at a medium -height and drops short. Short-slip must then regulate his position -accordingly. When he sees the batsman lean forward he must advance one -step; when the batsman hangs back and the ball is on the off side he -should hang back too and hold the hands low; for assuredly if anything -comes it will be a hard low catch. He should study the slow bowler’s -action so as to know when his fast balls are coming, and drop back. He -should also ponder on the pace of the ground, and never forget that -_wet on the top of a hard ground makes the fastest surface of any_: in -these circumstances, therefore, he should stand finer and deeper. When -the rain soaks in, the balls pop, and catches come slower and higher. -Short-slip should back up when balls are thrown, not from short- nor -from long-leg, but from mid-on and mid-off and cover-point, and should -run across, when there is a run to third man, between the wicket-keeper -and short-leg. This last is a tiring and often unremunerative -process, but if done through a long innings is in the highest degree -commendable. Short-slip must also run up to the wicket and take the -place of the wicket-keeper when the latter has usurped the functions -of an ordinary fieldsman and left his post to pick up and throw in the -ball to the wicket. - -[Illustration: Short-slip.] - - -THIRD MAN. - -This is another most scientific post, and one in which a bad fieldsman -is very much out of place. First, there is the twist. It is worth -knowing respecting a twist from a bat, that if the ground is hard and -the cut clean, the ball will not twist till it has lost some of its -impetus. Consequently stand straight in the line of a hard cut on a -smooth ground, as the ball, though it is _spinning_ all the time, will -not _curl_ till it is some way past third man. But if the turf is soft -the ball bites and curls on the second or third bound, seldom on the -first unless the stroke is a very slow one. The same holds good with -regard to long-leg. The batsman, if he were a genuine judge of a run, -would always ‘run’ to third man when the spin is likely to act at once, -since under those conditions the ball wants so much watching that third -man cannot well return it in time. But many batsmen do not know these -things. - -With regard to the distance of third man from the wicket, it is -important that he should judge it according as the batsmen are good -runners or not. He should estimate this at once from their appearance -and demeanour, standing well out if they are men of weight and dignity, -and nearer in if they are active and inclined to steal runs. After -they have run one run to him he should come a yard nearer in, feeling -like a man who has had a personal insult offered him, and is burning -to avenge it. Lastly, he has to consider the throw-in. _It is nearly -always best to throw to the bowler’s wicket_ (assuming, of course, -that he is ready behind the stumps and mid-on is backing up), for this -plain reason: it is generally the non-striker who calls the run, and -consequently starts the quickest, runs quickest, as he sees the danger -before him, and gets home the quickest. Even if he does not call the -run, he is backing up, and starts unshackled by having made a stroke. -So leave him alone. The striker, on the contrary, has made a stroke -(and one that throws him back a good deal), is not backing up, and does -not see the danger. Also, if he runs by the shortest way to the other -wicket, he will very likely be cut over. Circumstances, in short, are -against him. Above all, he seldom suspects that the ball is coming his -way, for very few third men ever throw to the right wicket, very few -bowlers are behind the stumps, and very few mid-ons back up. Third man -should stand squarer for a strong cutter than for a weak one. He should -back up behind short-slip when the ball comes from mid-on, and arrange -with cover-point as to the throws from short-leg, himself covering -point when the throws come from in front of the wicket, and cover-point -taking that place when they come from behind. - - -SHORT-LEG - -is an important place for backing up and saving singles. It is a -good plan to put a left-handed man here, as he can better command the -strokes between himself and mid-on, which are generally so prolific -of runs. Having fielded one of these, he ought not to throw to the -wicket-keeper, as he is already facing the bowler’s wicket, and the -bowler’s wicket is facing him, should he wish to throw it down. He -should of course previously make a league with mid-off as to the -backing up. The late Mr. R. A. Fitzgerald, in the book just mentioned, -‘Jerks in from Short-leg,’ once urged the importance of putting -the ‘witty man’ short-leg as a convenient spot for cracking jokes. -Certainly conversation in the field is often of great service towards -keeping the men brisk. Short-leg has to back up all the returns from -the off side, dropping well back if short-slip comes across for this -purpose, and in any case leaving ten or fifteen yards between himself -and the wicket. A captain of an eleven feels himself very often bound -by an unwritten tradition to put the notoriously worst field in his -eleven short-leg. No doubt it is exceedingly difficult to judge which -is the natural position for a bad field, but we unhesitatingly say that -several matches have been lost by bad fields at short-leg. In the days -of his prime people used to watch W. G. Grace playing ball after ball -in the direction of short-leg, especially when left-handed bowlers were -on. The late famous J. C. Shaw was not a good field in any sense of the -word; he was consequently often to be seen fielding at short-leg, and -we wonder how many times he has missed W. G. Grace in that position? -Missing Grace was, and is still, a most expensive mistake. There are -several players who are weak in their play off their legs, and these -players are continually sending chances to short-leg, while other -players are extremely fond of playing off their legs, and score very -heavily by the stroke; and it is wonderful to see how many runs a quick -field will save when such men are batting. - - -LONG-STOP. - -In these days of slow bowling and fine turf captains of elevens do not -bother themselves with providing long-stops at all. Wicket-keepers are -so good, the bowling is so straight, that, in the present year (1898), -it is impossible to say who is the best long-stop in England, for the -simple reason that no long-stops are wanted. But in the days of yore, -every schoolboy who was fond of cricket could tell you of the prowess -of Mortlock, H. M. Marshall, and A. Diver. Mr. Powys was a splendid -bowler, and so was Mr. R. Lang. But had not Mr. H. M. Marshall been -found to stop Mr. Lang’s balls, and Mr. F. Tobin those of Mr. Powys, -neither one bowler nor the other could have been put on at all. Such -long-stops as these stand rather on the leg side, and if the bowling -is very fast, just deep enough to take the ball as it rises after its -second pitch. This is not easy to do, and young hands feel tempted -to leave more room. But this, when the ball is very swift, scarcely -diminishes its speed at all, and the further off long-stop stands, the -more chance there is of the ball bounding awkwardly by the time it -reaches him. Long-stop, however, would be in an awkward position if -the batsmen ran every bye that is possible. To prevent their doing so, -he must throw over to the bowler, for the old reason that the striker -has the whole distance to run and has his back to the danger. Again, a -hard throw, straight down the pitch, places both batsmen in jeopardy, -the striker especially, and that is why he so often runs with his hand -to the back of his head, of course retarding his speed by so doing. It -is a harassing run to steal; and that, combined with the fact that it -is not scored to either batsman, is doubtless the reason why it is not -oftener stolen. Long-stop should accordingly be a strong thrower, and -mid-off a conscientious backer-up. Long-stop should back up (behind -short-leg) the returns from cover-point and mid-off. - - * * * * * - - -Before concluding these technical remarks, let us draw attention to -one or two circumstances connected with cricket affairs now which are -different from what they were formerly. We have said that in these -days long-stopping is a lost art, or rather it is not an art that -is required in modern elevens. It would appear miraculous to an old -cricketer who had seen nothing of the game for the last fifteen years -could he watch Spofforth bowling, and Blackham keeping wicket with no -long-stop, when the ground was hard. Such a thing would not have been -dreamt of twenty years ago. Then a ball used to shoot five or six times -in an innings of 135 runs, and the occasional shooter that occurs now -always results in four byes if it escapes the bat and the wicket. Hence -one important reason why formerly a long-stop was indispensable. Though -there are or were, a very few years since, some very fast bowlers, the -average pace now-a-days is far slower than twenty-five years ago, and -that is another reason for dispensing with long-stop. But the change -of tactics in not having a long-stop has had one effect that we regard -as pernicious, and that is, that it has spoilt one part of the skill -of wicket-keeping, and on the whole worked an enormous change for the -worse in the fielding of short-slips generally. The long-stop is not -there, both wicket-keeper and short-slip are conscious of this, and -they are aware that his place must be filled up by themselves. If a -ball goes in the least to leg, even if it only just misses leg-stump, -short-slip is usually to be seen backing up the wicket-keeper; for -four byes make an appreciable addition to the score. But though the -ball is on the leg side, it is quite possible for the batsman to hit -it on the off side, and send it straight to short-slip’s hands, if he -only could have been in his proper place. He is abused if he does -not back up the wicket-keeper, and in any case the mere feeling that -runs must result from the wicket-keeper not handling the ball makes -it impossible for him to give his undivided attention to fielding at -short-slip proper. He is continually shifting towards his left hand, -and numerous balls that he would have fielded if only there had been a -long-stop, now result in runs. The wicket-keeper is also in more danger -of being hurt, and as his position is necessarily one attended by -extreme responsibility and considerable pain, this further danger ought -to be spared him if possible. The risks he runs are from fast balls -outside the batsman’s legs. He cannot see the ball accurately so that -he may judge where to put his hands without moving his feet; in order, -then, to prevent the ball going to the ropes, he has to rush right in -front of it, at the risk, if the ball should bump or do anything odd, -of getting hit on the face or elsewhere. If a long-stop were behind -him, he would try and take the ball for the sake of a possible catch -or stump-out, but he would not expose himself to danger by getting in -front of it. - -Two corollaries must be drawn from what has been already said. The -first is that the bowler should be just as prepared to receive a -throw-in as the wicket-keeper. When both wickets are menaced, the -danger of a short run is doubled, and an overthrow is oftener due to -the bowler and backer-up than to the field. But it is said ‘This is all -very fine, but the bowler cannot get behind his wicket in time.’ No -assertion could be wider of the mark. Take some genuine cricketer as an -example, and no better one could be chosen than Mr. A. W. Ridley, some -sixteen years ago. Lob-bowlers follow their own ball further down the -wicket than any other kind of bowler, and of all lob-bowlers Mr. Ridley -did this the most. But no one has ever seen a short run got off his -bowling, without, at least, at the same moment seeing him dart behind -the wicket, and be ready to put down the hardest throw anyone might -send to him. He is always there in time, and any bowler in the country -might do the same if he were cricketer enough to see what is wanted. -The second inference to be drawn is, that it is highly important to -pursue a medium hit with all possible speed, and to throw it in as if -it burnt the fingers to retain the ball a moment. We do not remember an -eleven who neglected this less, as a whole, than the Players eleven of -the year 1887, and the number of runs that can be saved by observance -of the rule is immense. - -These are the two most important directions which can be given to any -young cricketer, and especially to any young captain of a side, in -order that he may select his men with a view to these requirements of -the game. The general fielding capacity of a whole team depends on the -attention devoted to such dull points by the eleven minds, not less -than on the suppleness of the eleven backbones. No directions, it has -already been said, will make a bad field into a good one. But it is -equally true that no advice should be offered which cannot be acted -upon. Consequently only some duties of a fieldsman have been described. -But it is not too much to say that a careful attention to these points -would ultimately turn eleven indifferent cricket players into a good -fielding team. - -In a work necessarily somewhat didactic as this is, it may be -advisable to remind youngsters that the finger of scorn is pointed -even more to the very bad field than it is to the very bad batsman -or bowler. A very bad bowler will not be asked to bowl unless the -bowling is hit into a thoroughly entangled knot--as was the case in an -Australian _v._ England match in 1884, when every member of the English -team, including Shrewsbury, had to bowl--and then, if he fails, he has -only done what was expected of him. But it is difficult for anybody -to explain, except on the ground of gross carelessness, how a man who -is a good bat or bowler can be so utterly useless as a field as some -have turned out to be. The cricketer who never appears to have grasped -the rudiments of the laws concerning twist, who is lazy and will not -run after the ball, and who hardly by accident holds a catch, is an -eyesore in cricket. And let us also assure the young practitioner that -an intelligent audience, though a somewhat rough one, such as you -may see at places like Bramall Lane, Sheffield, will jeer in audible -and not too polite tones at the bad field long before it will do the -like at bad batsmen or bowlers. Every cricketer knows the different -eccentricities of indifferent fields, their wonderful varieties of -error, and the specious appearance of some that fatally delude the most -patient captain. There are some men who are fairly fast runners, and -can throw hard, and yet are fields of a character to make angels weep. -They dash in at the ball like a man charging at football, with the -result that they half stop it, or, after they stop it, in attempting -to pick it up, they kick it eight or ten yards behind them. They never -seem to be able to judge what sort of length the ball will come into -their hands, and never under any circumstances is the ball cleanly -handled. And yet they go at it so heartily, they move so quickly, and, -at first sight, look so alert and full of promise, that it is difficult -to condemn them until you have had two or three days’ experience of -them. This sort belongs to the class we call the specious fieldsman. -Then there is the man who might look at a batsman for two hours and yet -never discover where his favourite stroke is likely to go, who obeys -orders strictly, and when he has taken up the position assigned to -him, stands there like a tree, despite the fact that every ball hit in -his direction is a little too much on his right or on his left hand. -This individual may safely be assumed to be a creature of a low order -of intelligence, to whom Providence has probably vouchsafed a natural -instinct for bowling, in the absence of which he would never be seen on -any cricket-ground again, except as a spectator. He is so stupid that -he never can excel in batting. Then there is the man who is very slow -and has not acquired the merit of being what may be called an eminently -safe field. His position when endeavouring to stop the ball is that -illustrated by the figure on the opposite page, which shows what is -essentially the wrong position to assume. Probably he will not touch -the ball with his hands, and it certainly cannot be stopped by his legs -or feet. He can hold a catch sometimes and stop a ball occasionally, -but he does not succeed in these two particulars often enough to make -one forget or forgive his extraordinary slowness. Another variety is -the man who fields tolerably well sometimes, but, when he fails to stop -a ball, either runs after it very slowly, which is the sulky form, -or else dashes after it and throws it wildly and very hard anywhere, -causing overthrows by the dozen, and maiming his comrades’ fingers. -This is the angry form--an odious type; let every youngster beware of -such and develop not into it. Every cricketer ought to try to become as -good a field as he can by assiduous practice--for this reason, if for -no other: bowlers get disorganised when the fielding is loose. - -A natural curiosity is always evinced where a critic shows a tendency -to name certain celebrities in any form of game. This is the reason why -we now proceed to praise famous men and famous fielding elevens; but -let us add that we do not profess to name every good man who has ever -fielded, and can only beg for forgiveness if we omit to mention some -who have deserved recognition. - -[Illustration: The wrong position for stopping the ball.] - -The various Australian elevens have earned great fame for their -fielding in England, and it was no doubt very good. At the same time we -think it was not so good as their batting, and certainly not so good as -their bowling. The elevens of 1882 and 1884, which were the best, no -doubt won their matches by all-round play; but if we had to name a weak -point we should say that, as compared with the batting and bowling, -it was their fielding, although this was very good. The Australians -themselves say--at least, so we have heard--that the fielding in -Australia of the Hon. Ivo Bligh’s eleven was never surpassed in the -colony; and that must be high praise. Still, judging by what we know -of that team, we think that we can point out higher standards in -England. The finest fielding we have ever seen was that of the Players -in 1887 in their annual match at Lord’s against the Gentlemen, and at -the Oval it was nearly as good. But that was only for two matches. As -is natural, University teams, from their youth and habit of playing -together, have earned great fame as fielding elevens, and if we had to -select four elevens whose fielding reputation ought to be inscribed -on the highest pinnacles of fame, we should name the Cambridge -representatives of 1861 and 1862 and the Oxford of 1874 and 1875. - -The Cambridge celebrities of 1861 and 1862 have faded away into -distance, and the present generation know not their names. Both those -elevens had several fast bowlers in them, and one--Mr. R. Lang--was -superlatively good. It was owing to this fact that Cambridge had -to provide itself with a long-stop, and Mr. H. M. Marshall in that -capacity has earned undying fame; for long-stopping on Lord’s Ground in -1861 and 1862 was no laughing matter. As general out-field Mr. Marshall -also stood very high, and was a perfectly safe catch. Contemporary -cricketers of that day are nearly unanimous in their praise of Mr. W. -Bury as a fieldsman; at long-leg he has never been excelled. There -were besides these the Hon. C. G. Lyttelton at point, and Mr. R. Lang -at short-slip. ‘Bell’s Life’ of that date mentions as a fact that -the fielding of Cambridge in the University match of 1862 was never -equalled on Lord’s or any other ground. Those were the days when the -bowling was mainly fast, the ground rough, and the cautious safe field -who got stolidly and fixedly in a certain position was often defeated -owing to the ball making unspeakable bounds. It required a touch of -genius to be a grand field at Lord’s in those times, and several -members of those two Cambridge elevens possessed it. The two Oxford -elevens of 1874 and 1875 had each only one fast bowler, but they had -magnificent fielding teams to support their slow bowlers. When the -bowling is generally slow, amateur wicket-keepers can hold their own. -This was the case in 1874 and 1875, and in Mr. H. G. Tylecote Oxford -possessed a wicket-keeper fully up to the mark for the work he had to -do. It used to be a bone of contention between Messrs. W. Law and A. -W. Ridley, the captains respectively of ’74 and ’75, as to which of -the two elevens was the greater in this particular line of fielding. -Mr. Law, whose early death everyone who knew him deplores, contended -that his eleven in 1874 made no mistake in the Inter-University match, -whereas the 1875 eleven did. But the Cambridge batting in 1874 was -fatuous to a degree, and the Oxford eleven had nothing to stop, whereas -Cambridge in 1875 batted very well and kept their opponents hard at it. -We are willing to give equal credit to each, and to enshrine the names -of Law, Game, Ridley, T. B. Jones, and Royle in the temple of fame. - -It is not easy to gauge the merits of the fieldsmen of forty years -ago. Some of them have made their names live: Mr. T. A. Anson as -wicket-keeper, Mr. R. T. King at point, and the famous W. Pickering -at cover-point, for instance. But, though they had rougher ground to -field on, still the scoring was nothing like so large, matches were not -nearly so numerous, and the wear and tear far from being so great. The -first thing that strikes one on reading over old scores and comparing -them with those of the present day, is the enormous number of extras -that were then given. Bowlers were, no doubt, faster, but they bowled -many more wides. Taking one year at random, 1880, we find that for the -whole season Yorkshire in all matches only bowled eight wides, five -of which were delivered by the famous Tom Emmett, who is, no doubt, a -slightly erratic bowler. In the days of Redgate and Mynn the wides were -numerous, so were the no-balls, and frequently the extras contributed -more to the total than any one batsman. If the bowling was fast and -erratic, one cannot wonder that byes became numerous, especially when -the rough ground is also considered. In the University match of 1841 -Oxford gave Cambridge 56 extras out of a combined total of 223--a -very large average. In 1887 Cambridge only gave Oxford 14 extras in a -combined total of 461, and Oxford lost but three wickets in the second -innings. In the same year Oxford gave Cambridge only 20 extras in a -grand total of 459. Though bowling is generally slower now than forty -years ago, still in former days they used to have long-stops to bowling -that even amateur wicket-keepers would now stop. The long-stopping -wicket-keeper--that is, the wicket-keeper that lets nothing pass -him--is a marvellous testimony to the excellence of modern grounds, the -accuracy of modern bowling, and the skill of the men themselves. The -sight of Blackham, standing close up to the wicket, stopping Spofforth -and Palmer would have made our forefathers look on aghast. In the -well-known print of the Sussex and Kent match in 1840, old Lillywhite -is bowling, and he was a slow medium-pace bowler; yet, though Tom Box -was reckoned the best wicket-keeper of the day, he has a long-stop to -Lillywhite’s bowling. - -We may now try to enumerate the greater fields of cricket history. We -read of the marvellous feat of Mr. T. A. Anson at the wicket, when he -stumped a man off a leg-shooter of Alfred Mynn, one of the fastest -bowlers of the period. We yield the place of honour to Mr. Anson for an -individual feat, but it is alleged to have taken place a long time ago, -and is it certain to be true? The greatest wicket-keepers since 1860 -in England have been Lockyer, Pooley, Pilling, Pinder, Storer, Lilley, -and D. Hunter; and we ask Plumb and Sherwin to forgive us. It is not -easy to discriminate between these; we merely remark that to genuine -slows of the pace of Southerton, Peate, and Tyler, we reckon Pooley -to have been the best that ever lived; and to the very fast, Pinder -and Storer were unequalled. Still Pooley was relatively not so good to -fast, nor Pinder to slow; and, on the whole, they may be left on an -equality. The best wicket-keepers of old days were Mr. Herbert Jenner, -Mr. T. A. Anson, Mr. W. Ridding, and Mr. W. Nicholson among amateurs, -and E. G. Wenman and Tom Box among professionals. The two best English -amateur wicket-keepers that ever lived, in our opinion, are Mr. Alfred -Lyttelton and Mr. McGregor, and besides them, since 1860, there have -been Mr. Leatham, Mr. Bush, Mr. Newton, Mr. E. F. S. Tylecote, Mr. -Philipson, Mr. Kemble, and Mr. Gay. - -Perhaps a word would not be out of place here respecting Mr. Blackham, -the celebrated Australian wicket-keeper. When the Colonial Eleven -came over in 1878, 1880, 1882, and 1884, practically the whole of the -wicket-keeping had to be done by Mr. Blackham. In 1880 and 1886 Mr. -Jarvis assisted him. Now wicket-keeping is essentially an amusement -you can have too much of. In old days, when there was a lot of fast -bowling, the cream of the wicket-keeping used to be seen during the -first six weeks of the season, because during that time the hands of -the wicket-keeper were more or less sound. The famous George Pinder, at -the beginning of his career, had faster bowling to keep to consistently -than any other cricketer before or since. Freeman, Emmett, and Atkinson -were three very fast bowlers, and they all three played for Yorkshire, -and after them came Hill and Ulyett. Pinder in consequence very -frequently damaged his hands, and no wonder. Blackham, however, during -all the four years we have mentioned, had Spofforth and either Garratt -or Palmer to stop. Now although these were not so fast as the Yorkshire -lot, they bowled a goodish pace; the Australian season consisted of two -matches a week from the beginning to the end of the cricket year, and -Blackham did not get very many days off. When his record is examined, -therefore, we think that his performances during these four years -constitute the greatest wicket-keeping feats on record. Not unless -Spofforth bowled his fastest did he ever have a long-stop, and he -held his hands closer to the wicket than any other wicket-keeper we -ever saw. If the batsman was an inch out of his ground for a second -or so, the ball would be put down, and a stump-out resulted, for the -hands had no distance to travel, and no time was lost. Of course the -bowling he had to stop was very accurate, but when the amount of -wicket-keeping that he had to go through and the number of wickets he -got are considered, our opinion is that Mr. Blackham was the finest -wicket-keeper to bowling of all paces that the world has ever seen. - -There have been numerous fieldsmen at point who have made themselves -a name, and by universal testimony, in his day, Mr. R. T. King, -of Cambridge University, was not approached in excellence in this -position. The late Mr. John Walker, who was intimately acquainted with -cricket of that period as well as with that of a later date, once told -the writer that in his opinion none of the modern points ever came -quite up to Mr. King’s level. Since 1860 Carpenter, R. C. Tinley, E. M. -Grace, and F. W. Wright have earned high reputations in this position, -but a great many excel at point, and in the University match alone -there has been some admirable fielding here; the Hon. J. W. Mansfield -for Cambridge, and Mr. Hildyard for Oxford, both being very good. -The place where good fielding is most conspicuous is midway between -cover-point and mid-off, and with this post the name of Mr. G. B. Studd -is for ever identified. In later days, Briggs, Moorhouse, Gregory the -Australian, Mr. Andrews of Sussex, and Wainwright excel in this place. -Mr. Royle at cover-point has never been excelled, and the same may be -said of Gunn at third man. The celebrated fieldsmen of old were Mr. W. -Pickering at cover-point; John Bickley and Mr. R. Lang at short-slip; -Mr. E. S. E. Hartopp, Mr. H. M. Marshall, W. Pilch, A. Diver, W. -Mortlock, and J. Thewlis at long-stop; while F. Bell, W. Bury, John -Smith, and A. Lubbock were excellent at a distance from the wicket. -There have been also, and are, many fields who were and are good at any -place; for instance, the renowned Mr. V. E. Walker, and the still more -famous Mr. W. G. Grace. We have said before, and we say it again, that -the fielding, though probably as good as ever it was, is not so good as -it ought to be. The nuisance of the day is the long scoring; we wonder -how many innings of 100 are played where you do not read the well-known -remark, ‘the batsman gave a chance at 24, another at 62, and a third -just before he was out, but none the less he played a fine innings.’ -The following brief epigram is undoubtedly true--‘Good fielding makes -weak bowling strong and strong batsmen weak.’ An eleven that is really -A1 in fielding very rarely has to field out for 300 runs. When we say -this we feel inclined to go further and add that if no feasible catches -are dropped this total of 300 runs would not be of anything but the -rarest occurrence. This fact ought of itself to be sufficient to make -every true cricketer try and become, if not a brilliant field, at any -rate one who, when a catch is sent him, does not cause a thrill of -agonising anxiety to arise in the minds of the supporters of the side -to which he belongs. - -[Illustration: An anxious moment.] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[33] We are largely indebted to an article on this subject by the Hon. -and Rev. E. Lyttelton, which appeared in _Lillywhite’s Annual_ for 1881. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -COUNTRY CRICKET. - -(BY F. GALE.) - - -I can remember the first cricket match I ever saw as well as if it -happened yesterday; and moreover I can give the names and description -of many of the players. - -The _locus in quo_ was the meadow opposite the Green Lion at Rainham, -in Kent, which is situated halfway between London and Dover. The -cricket field is now built over. It adjoined the vicarage garden, in -which a stand was erected for my brother and myself, and from which we, -as little boys, saw the first game of cricket we ever witnessed, in the -summer of 1830, as we had come into Kent from a Wiltshire village where -cricket was not known. - -Our grand stand was immediately behind the wicket. Farmer Miles, -a fine-set-up man, was the best bowler, and he bowled under-arm, -rather a quick medium pace, and pitched a good length and bowled very -straight, his balls curling in from the leg; for be it remembered that -but two years had elapsed since it was allowable to turn the hand, -knuckles uppermost, in delivery. I was seven years old at the time, -and was perfectly fascinated at the sight; and as the gardener, an -old cricketer, stood by me all day and explained the game, before the -sun had set I had mastered most of the main points in it. One thing I -am certain of, which is that there was an on-break from Farmer Miles’ -bowling; for I watched the balls pitch and curl. - -[Illustration: MITCHAM GREEN] - -The dress of the cricketers was white duck trousers and flannel -jackets, and some wore tall black hats and some large straw hats. A -few old fogies, veterans who played, had a silk pocket-handkerchief -tied round the left knee so that they could drop down on it without -soiling their white trousers; for in the rough out-fielding when the -balls jumped about anyhow old-fashioned fieldsmen would drop on one -knee, so that if the ball went through their hands by a false bound -their body was in the way. Josiah Taylor, the brazier, was long-stop, -and played in black leather slippers with one spike in the heel which -he claimed as his own invention, as cricket-shoes were little known. -The umpire was Ost, the barber, who appeared in a long blue frock-coat -like Logic’s, the Oxonian, in ‘Tom and Jerry,’ and who volunteered -‘hout’ to a fieldsman who stopped a bump-ball; and when remonstrated -with by men of both sides remarked, ‘Surel_y_ first “bounce” is “hout” -at cricket and trap.’ This occasioned a change of umpire. There were -two very hard hitters, Charles Smart, a tall young fellow, son of a -rich farmer, and ‘Billy Wakley,’ a very stout tall young farmer; there -were many hits to the long-field off and on, which were well held; and -Charles Watson, a promising lad of about sixteen, the butcher’s son, -who played for the first time in a man’s match, immortalised himself -by making a long catch close to the vicarage hedge. The batting mostly -consisted of hard-hitting, and the catching was good. The booth was -made up of rick-cloths strained over a standing skeleton woodwork -frame; and on the right of it was a round table with six or eight -arm-chairs placed on either side; a large brass square tobacco-box out -of which those who sat round the privileged table could help themselves -by putting a halfpenny into a slit which caused the box to open (on -the same principle as the chocolate and sweet-stuff automatic pillars -seen now at railway stations), kept company with a stack of clay-pipes. -The arm-chairs were for the accommodation of the principal farmers and -magnates of the parish who subscribed to the matches and who sat in -state and smoked their pipes--as cigars were little known--and drank -their grog out of rummers--large glasses which stood on one gouty leg -each and held a shilling’s worth of brandy and water; and for the -accommodation of the smokers, the ostler, who always appeared in his -Sunday best costume, which consisted of a ‘Sam Weller’ waistcoat with -black calico sleeves, brown drab breeches, and top-boots, provided a -stable horn lanthorn, the candle in which he lit with the aid of the -flint and steel tinder box, and brimstone matches; for lucifers were -not yet invented. - -Another honour belonged to the knights of the round table: as the -cricket ground was bounded on the southern side by the high road, -and as coaches were passing all day, the drivers never forgot the -‘Coachman’s Salute’ with whip and elbow and nod of the head as they -drove by, and this was always returned by a cheery wave of the hand -from the cricket ground. The patriarchs of the village had a form to -themselves on the left hand of the booth; and old Billy Coppin, the -half-pay naval purser, who had a snug little house on the bank of the -roadside, sat outside his door waving his pipe and crying out, ‘Make -sail, my lads, make sail,’ whenever a good hit was made. - -When the match was over, one of the villagers, an ill-tempered -thatcher, who was always ready for a set-to, picked a quarrel with -someone from a neighbouring parish, and they adjourned to a quiet -corner close to our grand stand behind the booth, pulled off their -shirts and had a pretty stiff rough and tumble fight, which I -described, in my innocence, at supper when I went in, and thereby got -the gardener into a scrape for allowing me to see it. A very serious -relative told me that she was ‘cock sure’ of the future fate of the two -men who fought, quoting cases out of Dr. Watts’s hymns. Let us hope -that some of the Doctor’s tips have proved wrong. - -‘Would you be surprised to hear,’ as Lord Coleridge was always saying, -that, with the exception that cricket has much improved as regards -grounds and some of the implements in general use, old-fashioned -village cricket in its true and pure spirit still flourishes in many -rural districts, and not very far from London even, now? You will find -this happy state of things mostly where village greens exist in a real -cricketing county; and having formerly devoted much of my leisure, -during very many years, to country cricket, I can speak from actual -experience, down to present date. - -In the first place, every village green has a history of its own, and -the people are proud of their old traditions. On many of these greens -some of the best-known cricketers in England have from time to time -appeared during a century past, and some come there occasionally now -during every summer; so the cricketers of all classes have always had -good models to work from. The green is common to all, and all have a -common interest in the honour of the parish. This charming home feeling -is admirably described by Miss Mitford in the ‘Tales of our Village;’ -and she has not exaggerated it. The consequence is that by one consent -the centre of the green is always left for good matches, and as every -village boy learns the management of turf, you would be surprised to -see what an admirable pitch youngsters of fourteen or fifteen years of -age will make for themselves on somewhat rough ground with the aid of a -five-pronged fork, a watering-pot and a hand-roller; and you would be -surprised to see what _real_ good cricket many of them play. Of course -there is always a sprinkling of sons of good cricketers who have been -well taught, and they have the opportunity of instruction from old -players. - -The training of village boys is very analogous to cricket fagging at -school, and anyone who takes an interest in village cricket will do -well, when he and a few friends practise, to have any little boys of -twelve or thirteen who show any proficiency to field out for them, and -to encourage them with a few coppers, making them understand that the -honorarium is dependent on their trying to do their best. The next step -is to take a lively interest in the boys’ eleven, which consists of -boys under fourteen or fifteen, to promote their matches in every way, -and to inculcate the value of fair play. It does them a great deal of -good if an old cricketer will spare half an hour, when the boys are -practising, to criticise their play, pointing out any faults, such as -running over the crease, bowling no balls, not backing up for a run, -explaining to them the principles of running, and calling their partner -(secrets which some really good batsmen never _have_ learned and never -_will_ learn), and so on. The grand thing is to try and make cricket -_real_, and to make youngsters understand that playing the strict game -is the secret of true enjoyment. We all know how all pleasure depends -on observance of simple rules, and on doing in practice all things -as carefully as if we are engaged in a match, or any other friendly -strife. Even if I play at ‘beggar your neighbour’ with a child I insist -on the rigour of the game. Many of us must know as cricketers, too, -that long after we had given up playing in matches, there was immense -pleasure in having a first-rate professional, on a real good wicket, to -bowl, with sixpence on the wicket. - -The very mention of single wicket now is like the mention of jalap and -rhubarb and calomel and bleeding, those terrible remedies of the past, -to a modern doctor; but single wicket with seven or eight in the field -is the finest practice for training, and we found it so on our village -green, a very few years ago, played thus. Every man’s hand was against -his neighbours in turn, and there were no sides. Of course, with six -or seven in the field, byes and hits behind wicket counted, and this -fact made the youngsters try to cover as much ground as possible. The -batsman went out if he got ten runs; and as in these games there was, -at least, one good professional bowler, it took a good man to score -ten runs. The professional and any amateur who had any pretence of -being a bowler changed about. These games were very good for putting -a youngster into; and I have seen three or four hundred people on the -green watching one of these trials. It was also a good thing, in the -event of a substitute being wanted in a good match, to try one of them, -as it accustomed an aspirant to accept responsibility and to play -before a crowd. It is a wholesome state of things when young cricketers -are at hand anxious to fill a vacancy; it shows zeal. - -Anyone who has charge of village cricket falls very short of his duty -if he does not arrange at least one real practice afternoon a day or -two before a match. He must have a good wicket made, and all who are -going to play in the match must come for some part of the play. And -this is a good opportunity for letting young bowlers come and try their -hand, with sixpence on the wicket. I have much faith in that sixpence -on the wicket. It is useless to waste any trouble on a boy who has not -got cricket at heart, but it is a great deal of use training one who -has. The difficult stage is when a boy’s strength is growing and he -is old enough to be taught strict cricket as regards defence, and in -trying to steady him down you must be sure to steer clear of the evil -of cramping his hitting power. We know from experience that sometimes -matches are lost or draws made owing to the want of a man who will -go in and hit. In my boyhood days there used generally to be one, or -perhaps two, in every eleven who could field splendidly, and who made -no pretence to scientific batting, but who, aided by a strong nerve -and quick eye and a heavy driving bat, could sometimes make a terrible -example of the bowling and help the score. Mr. Absolom, of Cambridge, -and afterwards of the Kent eleven, was one of this class. He was worth -playing in any eleven in England for his bowling, fielding and hard -work, and if he never made his runs, his share towards success was -as great as those who made a score. The thing to ‘burn’ into a young -player’s mind is, that unless he can concentrate all his thoughts on -the match in which he is playing he will never be an English cricketer. -He may, perhaps, by long practice acquire the knack of getting a lot of -runs, and building up an average, but if that is all that he is worth, -he had much better never have been in the eleven at all. Amongst eleven -men, some are sure to get a lot of runs generally, but the men who win -matches are those who prevent the other side getting them. Take one of -the best samples of cricket in the season of 1887, as a proof of what -saving runs means. I think that anyone who knows the game can hardly -help coming to the conclusion that Gunn, in the long field, saved more -runs in 1887 than the best man made, and saved a good many more too. -The Australians put their main trust in their field, and they taught -us a good lesson when they came first, and it has done us good. Gunn’s -batting is often equal to his fielding, to say nothing of his bowling. - -Now we come to a more serious matter--management and finance; and, -unless the world has very much changed in the last few years, anyone -who takes a new lead in country cricket will find himself surrounded -by hosts of friends (?) who are worth nothing. They will all want to -come on the committee, and make all kind of wild suggestions about a -stock of club bats, pads and gloves, &c. There is only one antidote to -this, which is to stand firm on one point--that no public subscriptions -shall be asked for for any purpose other than keeping the green in -order, paying for balls for matches, match-stumps, hire of tents, -umpires, scorers, and other inevitable expenses; the simple inducement -for subscriptions being the having a few good matches during the -season, and keeping up a ground for the use of those who cannot pay for -themselves. Unless you keep up a good parish eleven, everyone will do -as he thinks best, and the whole green will be cut to pieces and will -never be repaired. - -In these days you cannot get an eleven who will make a good stand in -a match without some professional training. Many places are fortunate -enough to have an old professional or two amongst its inmates, men who -have given up grand public matches, but who are worth their weight in -gold as practice bowlers, trainers, and members of the village eleven. -Men of this class, who will play in a match for ten shillings or will -come in the evening after work for a crown or so, and who are always -on the spot, are the best aids towards keeping together a good set of -young players and forming an eleven. They know the young players and -take a pride in them, and will find out their failings and good points; -and nothing cheers a captain more than an invitation from a local -professional to come and see Bill Smith or Tom Brown bat. When such an -invitation is given, you may be sure that the professional has found a -recruit who can play a length ball with a straight bat and confidence, -and who can punish a loose ball. You will find numberless cricketers -who can get runs--if they once get set; but, like precious stones, many -get spoilt in the setting. What you want is batsmen who, in wet or -fine weather, on rough or smooth ground, will go in with nerve to have -a good try. If you want a few runs to-day from A, and he breaks down -through that cricket malady called ‘funk,’ it is no consolation to hear -from his _claqueur_ B that ‘A got seventy, not out, last week.’ - -You must try and raise the standard of a village eleven by letting -them play when you have the chance against teams who are stronger than -themselves. A licking is good medicine for them sometimes; and if, on -the other hand, they win by the chances of the game, a victory of this -kind ‘sets their tails up.’ The worst thing for them is playing against -weak teams, making a tremendous score, and knocking their opponents’ -wickets over for a few runs. It is astonishing how a captain, by -working steadily on, can ‘educate his party,’ as the late Lord -Beaconsfield said; and if by quiet persuasion he can influence some of -the rougher element to abandon their horse-play and ‘flowery’ language, -and to assist in keeping good order--at the same time warning them that -ladies and gentlemen are kept away from the green for fear of their -ears being contaminated by rough language--he will find that visitors -who come prepared for a noisy rude crowd will be surprised to find -perfect order; and if some one trangresses the bounds of good manners, -he will hear a cry of ‘Better language there!’ This kind of thing _can_ -be and _has_ been done; and the result was that, in a place where the -possibility of such a thing as a ladies’ tent on the green was laughed -at, not only was the ladies’ tent a great success, but subscriptions -flowed in in a wonderful manner. One dear old lady--an Exeter Hall-er -who took omnibuses full of people to hear Sankey and Moody--sent ‘two -guineas for the green, which is now, I believe, a place of innocent -amusement and happiness,’ as she stated in her letter. She _was_ a -good Christian, as her house stood deep long-leg, and many a time has -a ‘four’ been scored for a hit through her window--and this is fact. -With the enormous number of large schools in England where cricket -is played, it will seldom happen that any cricket neighbourhood has -not some young fellows from school, or possibly a few from either -University, close by; and if they happen to be of the right sort they -are a great boon. At the same time it should be a golden rule never to -put out of the eleven a good one, who has worked for and earned his -place, for a ‘swell.’ The rule must be kept hard and fast, that the -eleven is open only to those who have proved themselves good enough, -and if that rule is observed, in the event of a real first-rate amateur -turning up, you will generally find that more than one volunteer will -offer to stand out for him. - -Captaining a village team is not all a bed of roses; but if you are -really a cricketer at heart, you will soon acquire the absolute -confidence of people of all classes, especially of the humbler order. -It is not an unpleasant thing, as you walk across the green on your way -to the train, to hear a pack of little boys on their way to school, -who look on you as a kind of big dog that won’t bite, all chattering -about the match the day before. ‘Ah! Sir, I heerd my father say that he -won a pot over the match,’ says one. ‘That boy, Sir, got the stick for -playing truant yesterday morning,’ says another. ‘Well! if I _did_,’ -replies the culprit, ‘I _see_ the beginning of the match, and _you_ did -not--there!’ That boy may be another Fuller Pilch some day. - -And if you are sitting in the tent when your side is in, revolving -many things in your mind, and you feel that the whites of the eyes of -Mr. Chummy the sweep, a good cricketer formerly, who sits on a form -just outside the tent, behind a very short pipe, are glancing round -on you, what a comfort it is, if you turn round, to see an almost -imperceptible nod of Mr. Chummy’s head--for he never speaks during a -match--which says, ‘Going on all right--we shall win!’ That nod of -the head is only intelligible to a cricketer, just as a very ‘shy’ -rise of a trout is only perceptible to a genuine fisherman. Those, -too only who have known some celebrated cricketer from childhood, and -have watched his career and promotion from the little boys’ to the big -boys’ eleven, and eventually to the parish eleven, and have seen his -cricket talent developed from year to year until he appears in his -county team, can imagine how painful is the excitement to those who -are interested in his success. It has been my fate to go through--I -had almost said the agony of--that state of suspense many times, and I -must relate one instance. A young player, twenty years old, after my -earnest entreaty, was allotted a place in the county eleven. He broke -ground in London against Notts, and at his _début_ had to stand the -fire of Alfred Shaw and J. C. Shaw. Directly I saw him play the first -ball my mind was quite at rest, as he showed that he had not the stage -sickness. He got twelve runs in an hour and a quarter. His next public -appearance in London was a ‘caution,’ as he scored 20 not out, in his -first innings against Cambridge University; and, going in first, scored -82 in his second innings. This occurred nearly twenty years ago, when -cricketers played with their bats and not with their pads, and boundary -hits, except against the pavilion, were unknown; so fifty runs was a -grand score. I never shall forget my feelings when the colt had made -47, within 3 of his 50; I could look no more; when, all of a sudden, -I heard a roar from the crowd which told me that our village boy had -done it. The secretary of the club said, ‘He must have his sovereign -for fifty runs,’ and he promised me that if he made thirty more, which -would make a total of 100, including his 20 not out, he would give -him two sovereigns, if I would give him one for his first fifty. I -undertook to raise that capital; whereupon, a stranger, a very tall, -handsome, gentlemanly man, said, ‘And I will give him a sovereign too; -for’ (turning to myself) ‘your excitement, which I found was only -occasioned by interest in a village boy, and not heavy betting as I -imagined, has done me real good. I have been for thirty years in India -and am going back again in a month, and nothing pleased me more than -to find this keen love of sport still existing.’ He would not give his -name, and I could never find out who he was; possibly he is alive and -may read this, and may let us know who he was, for I am sure he has not -forgotten it. Richard Humphrey was the colt, and I sent for him into -the Pavilion, and the ‘illustrious stranger’ shook hands with him and -gave him the sovereign. - -The foregoing remarks about clubs apply to a country place with some -pretensions to first-rate cricket and a village green. In a rural -out-of-the-way place where the population consists of a class which -cockney writers call ‘Hodge,’ and which we call ‘chaw-bacons,’ bats and -balls and stumps and all implements must be provided by subscription. -In all other cases those who want to play cricket must pay for their -own cricket things. If a good ground is provided the cricket ought to -grow of itself. ‘And this country cricket must cost a good deal of -money,’ perhaps you will remark. Of course it does; so does fishing, -or shooting, or hunting, or any other sport. There are many men who -want to skim the cream of the cricket and to play in a good home match -who will not play in an out match because ‘they have not time,’ really -because they are too stingy. If you mean cricket you must back it -everywhere with all your heart and all your strength. Whatever you do, -never forget the wind-up match and supper at the end of the season, and -get some good cricketers from amongst your foes to join, and above all -a parson or two if possible. In these days, I need not say ‘abolish all -ribald songs and drunkenness,’ as cricketers have good manners now. - -As a last word, I must say something for country umpires. When -changes in the game are proposed, a lot of outsiders who try -their hardest to prevent penal laws being made intelligible, on -the ground that ‘the change will put too much on the umpires’ -shoulders--especially country umpires,’ are talking nonsense. In the -days of Caldecourt, John Bayley, Tom Barker, and Good at Lord’s, -umpires did their duty without fear or favour, and did not let men -‘cheat’, and the same stamp of umpires still exists in counties and -on many a village green; and if there are any umpires on public -grounds who cannot administer the law fearlessly, they had better be -supplanted by those who can. If batsmen in the past had shamelessly -stopped the ball with their pads without ‘offering’ at the ball with -their bat, country umpires would have given them out for unfair play, -on the same principle as wilfully obstructing the field. I suppose -they would call it l.b.w; and the crowd would have given the retiring -batsman (?) a _very_ cold reception; or perhaps a very hot one: neither -extreme of heat or cold is pleasant. The late Chief Justice Cockburn -said of county magistrates: ‘They may sometimes administer bad law, -but generally good justice;’ and the remark applies to village-green -umpires. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII. - -BORDER CRICKET. - -(BY ANDREW LANG.) - - -Mr. Gale has been saying his very pleasant say on country cricket in -England. A Border player, in his declining age, may be allowed to -make a few remarks on the game as it used to be played in ‘pleasant -Teviotdale,’ and generally from Berwick all along the Tweed. The first -time I ever saw ball and bat must have been about 1850. The gardener’s -boy and his friends were playing with home-made bats, made out of -firwood with the bark on, and with a gutta-percha ball. The game -instantly fascinated me, and when I once understood why the players ran -after making a hit, the essential difficulties of comprehension were -overcome. Already the border towns, Hawick, Kelso, Selkirk, Galashiels, -had their elevens. To a small boy the spectacle of the various red and -blue caps and shirts was very delightful. The grounds were, as a rule, -very rough and bad. Generally the play was on _haughs_, level pieces of -town-land beside the rivers. Then the manufacturers would encroach on -the cricket-field, and build a mill on it, and cricket would have to -seek new settlements. This was not the case at Hawick, where the Duke -of Buccleuch gave the town a capital ground, which is kept in very good -order. - -In these early days, when one was only a small spectator, ay, and in -later days too, the great difficulty of cricket was that excellent -thing in itself, too much patriotism. Almost the whole population of -a town would come to the ground and take such a keen interest in the -fortunes of their side, that the other side, if it won, was in some -danger of rough handling. Probably no one was ever much hurt; indeed, -the squabbles were rather a sham fight than otherwise; but still, bad -feeling was caused by umpires’ decisions. Then relations would be -broken off between the clubs of different towns, and sometimes this -tedious hostility endured for years. The causes were the excess of -local feeling, and perhaps the too great patriotism of umpires. ‘Not -out,’ one of them said, when a member of the Oxford eleven, playing -for his town-club, was most emphatically infringing some rule. ‘I can -_not_ give Maister Tom out first ball,’ the umpire added, and his case -was common enough. Professional umpires, if they could be got, might be -expected to prove more satisfactory than excited amateurs who forgot to -look after no balls, or to count the number of balls in an over. But -even professionals, if they were attached to the club or school, were -not always the embodiment of justice. - -The most exciting match, I think, in which I ever took part was for -Loretto against another school. In those days we were very weak -indeed. When our last man went in, second innings, we were still four -runs behind our opponent’s first score. This last man was extremely -short-sighted, and the game seemed over. But his partner, a very -steady player, kept the bowling, and put on some thirty-eight more. -We put our adversaries in to get this, and had lowered eight wickets -for twenty-eight. I was bowling, and appealed to the umpire of our -opponents for a palpable catch at wicket. ‘Not out!’ Next ball the -batsman was caught at long-stop, and a fielder triumphantly shouted, -‘Well, how’s _that_?’ - -‘Not out,’ replied the professional again, and we lost the match by two -wickets. - -If this had happened on the Border there would have been trouble, and -perhaps the two clubs would not have met again for years. I have no -doubt that a more equable feeling has come in among those clubs which -retained a good deal of the sentiments of rival clans. The Borderers -played too much as if we were still in the days of Scotts and Carrs, -and as if it were still our purpose - - To tame the Unicorn’s pride, - Exalt the Crescent and the Star. - -Sir Walter Scott encouraged this ardour at football when he caused -to be unfurled, for the first time since 1633, the ancient banner of -Buccleuch, with its broidered motto ‘Bellendaine.’ The dalesmen, the -people from the waters of Yarrow, Ettrick, and Teviot, played against -the souters of Selkirk, all across country, the goals being Ettrick -and Yarrow. The townsmen scored the first goal, when the Galashiels -folk came in as allies of the shepherds, and helped them to win a goal. -‘Then began a murder grim and great,’ and Scott himself was mobbed in -the evening. But he knew how to turn wrath into laughter. - -‘’Tis sixty years since,’ and more, but this perfervid ardour, while it -makes Border cricket very exciting, is perhaps even now a trifle too -warm. The great idea, perhaps, in all country cricket is not so much to -have a pleasant day’s sport, win or lose, but to win merely. Men play -for victory, as Dr. Johnson talked, rather than for cricket. This has -its advantages; it conduces to earnestness. But it does not invariably -promote the friendliness of a friendly game. - -Border cricket is very pleasant, because it is played in such a -pleasant country. You see the angler going to Tweedside, or Teviot, -and pausing to watch the game as he strolls by the cricket-ground. The -hills lie all around, these old, unmoved, unchangeable spectators of -man’s tragedy and sport. The broken towers of Melrose or Jedburgh or -Kelso look down on you. They used to ‘look down,’ as well they might, -on very bad wickets. Thanks to this circumstance, the present writer, -for the first and only time in his existence, once did the ‘hat trick’ -at Jedburgh, and took three wickets with three consecutive balls. Now -the grounds are better, and the scores longer, but not too long. You -seldom hear of 300 in one innings on the Border. - -In my time the bowling was roundhand, and pretty straight and to a -length, as a general rule. Perhaps, or rather certainly, the proudest -day of my existence was when I was at home for the holidays, and was -chosen to play, and bowl, for the town eleven against Hawick. I have -the score still, and it appears that I made havoc among Elliots, -Leydens, and Drydens. But they were too strong for our Scotts, -Johnstons, and Douglasses: it is a pleasure to write the old names -of the Border clans in connection with cricket. The batting was not -nearly so good then as it is now; professional instruction was almost -unknown. Men blocked timidly, and we had only one great hitter, Mr. -John Douglas; but how gallantly he lifted the soaring ball by the banks -of Ettrick! At that time we had a kind of family team, composed of -brothers and other boys, so small that we called ourselves _Les Enfants -Perdus_. The name was appropriate enough. I think we only once won a -match, and that victory was achieved over Melrose. But we kept the -game going on and played in all weathers, and on any kind of wickets. -Very small children would occasionally toddle up and bowl when the -elder members of the family were knocked off. Finally, as they grew in -stature, the team developed into ‘The Eccentric Flamingoes,’ then the -only wandering Border club. We wore black and red curiously disposed, -and had a good many Oxford members. The Flamingoes, coming down from -Oxford, full of pride, had once a dreadful day on the Edinburgh Academy -Ground. We were playing the School, which made a portentous score, and -I particularly remember that Mr. T. R. Marshall, probably the best -Scotch bat who ever played, and then a boy, hit two sixes and a five -off three consecutive balls. It is a very great pity that this Border -bat is so seldom seen at Lords’; his average for M.C.C. in 1886 was 85. -The Flamingoes lasted for some years, and played all Teviotdale and -Tweedside. - -In those days we heard little of Dumfries and Galloway cricket, into -which Steels, Tylecotes, and Studds have lately infused much life. In -recent years, Lord Dalkeith, Lord George Scott, and Mr. Maxwell Scott, -of Abbotsford, have contributed very much to the growth of Border -cricket. Money has never been very plentiful north of Tweed, and when -scarcely any but artisans played, the clubs could not afford good -grounds, or much professional instruction. In these respects there -has been improvement. Perhaps the boys’ cricket was not sufficiently -watched and encouraged. Veterans used to linger on the stage with a -mythical halo round them of their great deeds in the Sixties. Perhaps -the rising generation is now more quickly promoted, and better coached -than of old. I feel a hesitation in offering any criticism because I -had only one quality of a cricketer, enthusiasm, combined for a year -or two with some twist from leg. But, if I never was anything of an -expert, my heart hath always been with those old happy scenes and happy -days of struggling cricket. What jolly journeys we had, driving under -the triple crest of Eildon to Kelso, or down Tweed to Galashiels, or -over the windy moor to Hawick! How keen we were, and how carried beyond -ourselves with joy in the success of a sturdy slogger, or a brilliant -field! There were sudden and astonishing developments of genius. Does -J. J. A., among his savages on the other side of the globe, remember -how he once took to witching the world by making incredible and almost -impossible catches? _Audisne, Amphiarae?_ Michael Russell Wyer, I am -sure, among Parsee cricketers, has not forgotten his swashing blow. But -one of whom the poet declared that he would - - Push into Indus, into Ganges’ flood, - While all Calcutta sings the praise of Budd,[34] - -will no more ‘push leg balls among the slips.’ - - No longer make a wild and wondrous score, - And poke where never mortal poked before. - -This is the melancholy of mortal things. - -As Mr. Prowse sang - - The game we have not strength to play - Seems somehow better than before. - -Our wickets keep falling in this life. One after the other goes down. -They are becoming few who joined in those Border matches where there -was but one lady spectator, when we made such infrequent runs, and -often dropped a catch, but never lost heart, never lost pleasure in the -game. Some of them may read this, and remember old friends gone, old -games played, old pewters drained, old pipes smoked, old stories told, -remember the leg-hitting of Jack Grey, the bowling of Bill Dryden and -of Clement Glassford, the sturdy defence of William Forman. And he who -writes, recalling that simple delight and good fellowship, recalling -those kind faces and merry days in the old land of Walter Scott, may -make his confession, and may say that such years were worth living -for, and that neither study, nor praise, nor any other pleasure has -equalled, or can equal, the joy of having been young and a cricketer, -where - - The oak, and the ash, and the bonny ivy tree, - They flourish best at home in the North Countrie. - - * * * * * - -It is long since the writer has played in Border cricket, or even -seen the game in those quarters. A more modern sportsman, and an -infinitely better player, has kindly drawn up a few observations made -in recent years. On the whole, nothing, it seems, is altered. The game -is played mainly, as of old, by the stalwart artisans. There is little -patronage from the counties, and the middle classes are sunk in golf. -Money, therefore, is scarce, and, while very fair wickets are provided, -the out-fielder is harassed by difficulties of ground in many cases. -Time also is scarce, and thus lack of wealth prevents the Borderers -from doing themselves justice. At Langholm the family of the Duke of -Buccleuch, ‘the Langholm Lordies,’ set an example, and, at Dalbeattie -in Galloway, Steels, as of old, Studds, and Tylecotes play in autumn. -Mr. Maxwell of Glenlee, now dead, and Mr. Maxwell Scott of Abbotsford -were recently patrons of the game. On the whole, however, money and -encouragement are sadly lacking. - -The play, I gather, has improved, and the employment of professionals -has doubtless contributed to this result. There is a danger, however, -of depending too much on the professionals, who take part in the -matches between the clubs. The difficulties of umpiring are overcome in -matches for the Border Cup by the assistance of strangers, who truly -and indifferently minister justice. In other matches, I am told, the -umpires, being members of the rival clubs, are apt to suffer from ‘the -personal bias,’ and from accesses of local patriotism. This defect is -not absolutely confined to the Border. Football, a game entailing less -expenditure of money and time, is naturally better rooted and more -flourishing than cricket. It is also less dependent on weather. On the -whole, improvement both in skill and in the wickets is to be noted, and -I conceive that a match is much less likely than of old to degenerate -into a Border brawl. But cricket is not the national game of the -country which gave birth to golf and can hold her own at football. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[34] The maker of a formidable bat. - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - -HOW TO SCORE. - -(BY W. G. GRACE.) - - -Ask any player who has scored over a hundred in an innings if he felt -any particular influence at work on the morning of the match, and he -will probably answer in the negative; but press him, and he will admit -that he felt fit and well, and that the feeling was owing to a good -night’s rest, together with the careful training of days and weeks. I -am aware that there are exceptions to this rule, and that players have -been known to score largely after a night of high feasting and dancing; -but in my own experience, whilst admitting that occasional freaks of -this kind have been followed by moderately large scores, I cannot -recollect many of my big innings that were not the results of strict -obedience to the rules which govern the training for all important -athletic contests. Temperance in food and drink, regular sleep and -exercise, I have laid down as the golden rule from my earliest -cricketing days. I have carefully adhered to this rule, and to it in a -great degree I attribute the scores that stand to my name in cricket -history, and the measure of health and strength I still enjoy. - -Early in the season every cricketer knows the difficulty of getting -his eye in, but though he may be disappointed at the small score -attached to his name match after match, he plays steadily on, trusting -that by constant practice the coveted hundred will come. If he hopes to -score largely he must be careful in his manner of living and moderate -in all things, even though nature may have blessed him with exceptional -wrist power and sight. - -The capacity for making long scores is not a thing of a day’s growth, -and it may be years before strength and skill come and enable the -young cricketer to bear the fatigue of a long innings. He cannot begin -too early to play carefully and earnestly, and in all club and school -practice the lad should play as if he were engaged in an important -match, and the result depended upon his individual efforts. In my own -case, thanks to careful guidance, I was early taught to keep my wicket -up, never to hit recklessly, always to play straight or good-length -balls with force, and if possible away from the fielders. Habits of -that kind thoughtfully cultivated will not desert you in first-class -cricket. Great scores at cricket, like great work of any kind, are, as -a rule, the results of years of careful and judicious training and not -accidental occurrences. - -If you have occasion to travel a considerable distance to play, make an -effort to get to your destination the night before, or at least some -time before, the match begins. There is nothing so fatiguing to the -eyesight as a long railway journey, and going straight from the railway -station to the wicket is often fatal to long scoring. - -I have tried hard, especially of late years, to arrange so that I could -reach the ground in good time and save everything in the shape of hurry -or bustle. There are but few cricket grounds within a hundred miles of -each other where the light and conditions are alike, and it takes some -time for eye and mind to accommodate themselves to new surroundings. -You will find it just as trying to play in a blaze of sunshine, after -three days of smoke and leaden skies, as you will in a change from the -sunny south to the bleak, sunless north. - -You must also not only bear in mind the vast importance of reaching -the ground in good time, but the greater importance of getting five -or ten minutes’ batting practice before the innings begins. Very few -grounds are the same as regards the way in which the ball rises off -the pitch, even if the light be similar to that you have been playing -in for days, and it requires nothing short of a genius for the game to -change from a fast to a slow wicket, and play with the same ease and -confidence. - -I shall not readily forget an experience that came to me in 1871, when -I travelled from London to Brighton to play for the Gentlemen against -the Players for the benefit of John Lillywhite. Being very much younger -than I am now, I was blessed with clearness of vision and quickness of -action that suited themselves very readily to most conditions of light -and ground. Perhaps it was the inexperience of youth that led me to -put off reaching the old Brunswick ground at Hove until the moment of -beginning my innings. This I know, I felt as fit as ever I did in my -life, walked to the wicket with confidence, and took my guard carefully -to the bowling of J. C. Shaw. He was on at the sea-shore end, and there -was a glare on the water, delighting the artistic eye I have no doubt, -but to me shifting and dancing like a will o’ the wisp. There is no -need to deny the fact, I was all abroad to his first ball, and knew it -had beaten me before it came within two yards of me. I tried hard to -play it, but the ominous rattle told me I had failed, and I returned to -the pavilion and made the mental note. The dazzling light, the railway -journey, and want of five minutes’ practice did it. I had no desire to -repeat the performance in the second innings, and had little fear of -doing so. I took care to have some practice, and scored 217, my brother -G. F. made 98, and we increased the total by 240 runs in two and a half -hours. - -There is this also to be said in favour of five or ten minutes’ -batting practice before a match, that it enables you to test pads, -gloves, and shoes. To have the fastening of a glove or pad break off -when you are well set is a disagreeable and annoying interruption. It -takes some time to put things right, and when you return to the wicket, -the confidence you felt has very likely to a great extent deserted you. -And how often have you placed your boots in your bag, all the spikes -seemingly firm, to find one or two missing after you have been batting -for a few minutes! One has gone out of the toe of your boot, and you -play forward to a ball, miss your footing and get stumped; or one has -vanished from the heel, and you are called by your partner for a short -run, sent back again, slip, and get run out. Inattention to these -apparently small points causes annoyance, and may prevent you from -getting a long score. - -You are now ready to go in, and if you are first on the list you may do -it leisurely; but if you follow first wicket down, or later, impress -strongly upon your mind that it is your duty to get to the wicket -within the limit of time the law allows, and as quickly as possible, -particularly if your partner has got his eye in and looks like making -a large score. You will expect a like consideration when your turn -comes to wait, and nothing upsets a player so much as having to loiter -three or four minutes when he is warm and at home with the bowling, -especially when he knows there is no need for delay. There will be a -lack of confidence between you for some time at least, and indifferent -judging of runs. - -You will doubtless please yourself as to the guard to be taken; but -whether you take it to cover the middle and leg stumps, or middle -or leg only, be sure to keep your legs clear of the wicket. A good -umpire notes at the first glance if your leg is covering any part of -it, registers it against you, and remembers it when called upon for a -decision. If you stand clear of the wicket, he realises that you are -taking every precaution, will not decide without thinking, and will -give you the benefit of every doubt. - -Be sure you have your right foot firmly planted behind the popping -crease, or you may play a little too far forward and be stumped. You -may as well remove any small piece of grass or loose bit of turf that -catches your eye as you look along the wicket. After you have taken -guard, and marked it clearly, look all around and note the position of -the fieldsmen. It is something to know you may hit out to certain parts -of the ground without the risk of being caught. - -It is not very many years since, if you had asked the question how you -were to begin an innings, you would have been told to play quietly -for an over or two, and hit at nothing straight until you got your -eye in. With all my heart I say, do not be in a hurry to hit; keep up -your wicket and runs will come; but do not think that this means that -you are not to punish a loose ball if you get one, whether it be your -first or your twentieth. I understand it to mean that you are not to -hit at a good or doubtful ball for the sake of a start, or to shake -off the nervousness that affects a great number of players until they -have scored the first run. No; begin as you mean to go on, playing good -balls carefully, hitting loose ones, and bearing in mind that a large -score is not made in half-a-dozen hits or overs. Do not be surprised -and disappointed if the first few overs are maidens, or ruffled that -the score-sheet is still clean so far as you are concerned. Possibly -your partner has been placing balls that you could not get away, and -you grow impatient. That is foolishness, and fatal to your chance of -scoring. Remember he had been batting before you came in, and had -obtained the confidence and mastery over the bowling that is now -coming slowly but surely to you. Runs will come if you stay in, and -few bowlers can go on bowling over after over for half an hour or more -without giving you a loose ball or two. - -It is bad judgment to attempt sharp runs early in your innings. -Inclination that way is sure to be encouraged by the bowler, and when -you least expect it he will in some way unknown to you communicate with -the wicket-keeper and fielders, and the next attempt may end in you -or your partner being run out. A deal of harm has been done even if -you just saved it by an inch or two, and you will be in a most unhappy -state of mind for some time afterwards. It dawns upon you that there -was a degree of stupidity in the attempt, and it does not improve your -temper to have words of caution showered upon you from the pavilion. -The state of the game, the condition of the score did not demand it, -and you will be very lucky if you realise the fact, and recover your -usual coolness and confidence before resuming your innings. - -Exercise judgment when running out big hits. If you find the fielders -a little careless in throwing in, you may make a five out of what -looked like a four; but remember that to do this you will have to make -an exceptional effort that will try your wind. And now you have the -opportunity to show if your head is of the thoughtful kind. The bowler -will be delighted if he can tempt you to play the next ball before -you have got rid of the flurry and excitement, and you will be looked -upon as very obliging and thoughtless if you do. Very likely you have -resumed your position in front of the wicket with no intention of -playing for a second or two; perhaps the bowler is aware of the fact, -but that does not prevent him from bowling at you in the hope that you -may change your mind. Do not blame him if you play and are bowled. He -was not supposed to know that you were not ready, and you had no right -to be there recovering your breath; it will come back as freely to -you a yard or two away from the wicket as in front of it, and neither -bowler nor fielders ought to blame you for waiting for that purpose. -You are playing the game for your side as well as your individual -reputation, and ought to take all needful precautions. - -Be careful what you take to drink during a long innings. If you are -not accustomed to large scoring you are sure to feel thirsty, and your -mouth will become very dry before you have made many runs. A big drink -at this or any other time when you are in is a great mistake. For the -moment you feel as if you must quench your thirst, or you cannot go -on; you must, however, refrain, for there is nothing so insidious and -infectious as indulgence in drinks of any kind. In half an hour you -will want another, and the fieldsmen generally will sympathise and -lean to your way of thinking. Then there will be five minutes’ break, -you will probably lose sight of the ball, and very likely get out -immediately after. If you must have something, call for a little water: -it will answer the purpose perfectly. Rinse your mouth with it, swallow -as little as possible, and the thirst will quickly pass away. - -It is the first long innings that requires nerve and judgment. The -hopes and fears that spring up in the young player’s breast when he has -scored something between fifty and a hundred make it a severe trial; -and I daresay if you and I could read his thoughts we should find that -every run of the last ten was made in mental fear accompanied by a -thumping heart. But when the hundred is reached, who can describe the -joy that thrills him as he hears the hand-clapping and shouting! - -I will not say, be modest in the hour of victory, but rather be modest -after it. It is after the victory, as we listen to outside praise, that -conceit and its enervating influence steal in. Turn a deaf ear, and -remember it was in fear and trembling that you reached the much-desired -score. Quiet confidence is a widely different thing from conceit. The -former will help you to a run of big scores, the latter will cripple -every effort to sustain your hardly earned reputation. - -So far I have not touched upon the different wickets that are met -with during the season. There have been years, such as 1887, when the -weather has continued dry and fine for weeks, and the change from -ground to ground was hardly perceptible; but I have known the wicket -to change in a single match from dry, fast and true, to wet and soft, -and then to have finished sticky and unplayable. Anyone who can score -heavily through changes of that kind will be exceptionally fortunate. -I venture to think it may be of some use to young cricketers if I tell -them how they should play under these different conditions of ground. I -will begin with what is known as a fast, dry and true wicket. - -This is the wicket which all good cricketers like to play on, and, if -it does not crumble before the match is finished, long scores may be -expected. Never hesitate to play forward on a wicket of this kind, for -the bowler can get little or no work on the ball, and, what is more, -the further it is pitched up and the faster it comes along, the easier -it is to play it forward and the more difficult to play it back. On -such a wicket as this do not go in for lofty and ‘gallery’ hitting, or -you will very likely throw away your chance of making a long score. -If the bowler gives you a ball well up, instead of hitting very hard -at it, I should advise you to drive it along the ground; although you -may not score so many runs for it, still you do not incur the risk -of being caught out, and you will get the applause of those who know -what scientific batting means. Cuts and leg-hits travel at a rare pace -on a good fast ground, and timing and placing are of more importance -than strength. A snick to long-leg may bring more runs than a hard hit -straight, and a tap past long-slip goes flying to the boundary with a -very small expenditure of strength. Most long scores have been made on -a wicket of this description, and you do not tire half so much as you -would if the wicket were wet and heavy. - -In the season 1876--one of my best years--I remember playing in three -matches following each other when the ground was fast, dry and true. -The first match was at Canterbury, for Marylebone C.C. _v._ Kent. Kent -made the long score of 473, chiefly owing to the magnificent batting of -Lord Harris, who made 154. We responded with the comparatively small -total of 144. To follow on with so large a deficit was not encouraging; -but the wicket was still everything to be desired in pace and quality, -and I made up my mind to play a fast game, knowing that the bowler -could get little or no work on the ball, and that any attempt to play -carefully for a draw would be useless. It is now a matter of history -that we scored the first 100 in forty-five minutes, 217 well under -the two hours, and finished up with a total of 557 for nine wickets, -converting what appeared to be inevitable defeat into a creditable -draw. It took me a little over six hours to make my 344; but so good -and fast was the wicket that I played forward to most of the good balls. - -Two days after, on a similar wicket against Notts, playing for -Gloucestershire at Clifton, I made 177, and the same week 318 not out, -against Yorkshire at Cheltenham. The last wicket was one of the very -best I ever played on, and right through the innings I could play -forward without danger to nearly every ball bowled. Remember, then, on -a wicket of this kind to play forward as much as possible. - -I come now to a fast, good, wet wicket. It may surprise a great many -players when I say, play almost the same way as upon a fast dry wicket. -The bowler has still as much difficulty in getting work on the ball, as -it cuts through the ground and he cannot hold it owing to its wet and -slippery state, and you will find playing forward the better way. You -will have to be a little more watchful, for some balls will keep low -and travel at a terrific rate after they pitch, and should you get a -shooter it will come to you even faster than, on a dry wicket. Batsmen -on our perfect wickets of to-day think a ball that keeps low is a -shooter; but I wish they could come across the shooters we used to have -at Lord’s ground twenty years ago. They seemed completely to baffle -some players, and gave them the impression that the ball, instead of -travelling all along the ground, went under it and came up again at the -bottom of the wickets. - -Of course you will distinguish between a fast wet wicket and one that -is not thoroughly saturated. The latter, though perhaps quite as true, -will not be so fast, nor will runs come so quickly. A wicket of this -kind was formerly considered much in favour of the bowler; but that -opinion has been upset, and a good punishing batsman, who takes no -liberties, has the bowler pretty much at his mercy. In 1873, on a -wicket of this kind, I made 160 not out for Gloucestershire _v._ Surrey -at Clifton. In the early part of the innings the wicket was fast and -wet, and the ball travelled at a rare pace; but later on it became -softer, and the ball did not travel so well. - -A slow, good, dry wicket. You will occasionally meet with this kind of -wicket after rain, when the ground has not had time to dry sufficiently -to make it fast. The bowler can get more break on than he can on a -good fast wicket, but the ball rises slowly off the pitch and you have -plenty of time to watch it. You will rarely get a ball higher than -the bails, and you can play forward or back as the pitch admits. When -playing forward, you must not play too quickly, as the ball sometimes -hangs a bit and you may play it back to the bowler. It was on a wicket -of this kind at Clifton College ground that I scored a hundred in each -innings for Gloucestershire _v_. Kent in 1887. The first day the wicket -was perfect of its kind, every ball coming easy and with very little -break, travelling quickly when hit, as the outside ground was much -harder than the pitch, which had been watered. I made 101 in less than -three hours. Rain stopped play for some time on the second afternoon, -Friday, but by Saturday afternoon the wicket recovered, and I scored -103 not out in two hours and twenty minutes. Years ago, when youth was -more on my side, I preferred a very fast dry wicket; but now I confess -to a leaning for a good, slow, and dry one. - -The three wickets I have described must be considered easy, and -attention to the points I touched upon at the beginning should help the -batsman to score largely. I now come to two of a very different nature, -on which, as a rule, the bowler has a high time of it, and where -special nerve, skill, judgment, and luck on the part of the batsman are -required before he can make a large score. - -[Illustration: M.C.C. AND GROUND V. AUSTRALIANS, LORD’S, MAY 22, 1884 - -W. G. GRACE, L.B.W. BOWLED PALMER--101] - -First, a bumpy wicket. By a bumpy wicket I do not mean a fast fiery -wicket where the ball only goes over the top of the stumps and raps the -knuckles occasionally, but a wicket upon which you may get a shooter -one over and a blow on the chest the next, as a pleasing variety to -those that come frequently right over your head the first bound and -straight into the hands of the long-stop without again touching the -ground. I can assure all young players that there is a new and curious -sensation in facing balls of this kind. Skill, patience, a quick eye -and ready arm are useful for the occasion, but dogged pluck is worth -the whole of them. Do not let thoughts of hard knocks trouble you, -or your chance of scoring even a double figure will be remote. Take -your position at the wicket in your usual way, stand up to the bowling -pluckily, and do not have it said of you that you are only a good -wicket player. On a ground of this kind every run is valuable, and you -may risk stealing a sharp run or two now and then. One of your side may -make fifty or more runs, but the average score is sure to be small, -and you must face the possibility of hard knocks and play as if you -expected every ball to come true and a large score depended upon you. -I am glad to be able to say that, owing to the general improvement -that has taken place in the principal grounds, you rarely now meet -with a bumpy wicket. When the Yorkshire County Eleven made their first -appearance at Lord’s in 1870 to play against the M.C.C. and Ground, -the wicket was as bumpy as a wicket could be, and very few players on -either side escaped knocks of some kind. It was the first match in -which the alteration in law 9 came into operation, by which a bowler -could change ends twice in the same innings but not bowl more than two -overs in succession; and Alfred Shaw and Wootton availed themselves -of it in the second innings of Yorkshire. The M.C.C. went in first to -the bowling of Freeman and Emmett, and were all out for 73. Yorkshire -made 91, George Pinder, the well-known Yorkshire wicket-keeper, who was -playing for the first time at Lord’s, contributing 31. The prospect in -our second innings was not encouraging, and the wicket anything but -good, when that accomplished Essex sportsman, Mr. C. E. Green, joined -me; but if ever a good and sterling cricketer played pluckily under -adverse circumstances, Mr. Green did that day, and in seventy minutes -we scored 99 runs. Freeman bowled a terrific pace, and Emmett was in -his glory, his bowling bumping and kicking up as I have never seen it -since. We were hit all over the body, Mr. Green twice painfully hard -on the chest; but he was cool and cheerful, and made 51 in his best -style--and that is saying a great deal considering the number of balls -he had to dodge with his head. Just before I was out, last man, Emmett -bowled a ball which hit me very hard on the point of the left elbow, -the ball flew into the air, and we ran a run before it came down into -short-leg’s hands; but I could not hold the bat properly afterwards, -and was glad when the innings was over. I made 66, and our total was -161. Freeman, Iddison, Pinder and Wootton were all badly knocked about. -Yorkshire won by one wicket; thanks to the plucky hitting of Luke -Greenwood and the steady batting of Emmett. - -Now I come to a drying, sticky wicket. This is about the worst you -can play upon, and he who scores largely on it deserves to be praised -indeed. If the bowling be indifferent the player who can pull or hit a -long hop to leg has a decided advantage, as the ball hangs a great deal -at times and favours that kind of play. If the bowler be on the spot, -then tall scoring is an impossibility. The work to be got on the ball -is astounding; I have seen balls break a foot or more. - -This kind of wicket is oftener seen at Lord’s after a good deal of rain -and a drying sun than anywhere else. We all remember that great match -when the Australians made their first appearance there in 1878. I had -a fair conception of what might happen, and after hitting the first -ball of the match to the boundary was not surprised at being caught out -from the fourth. One ball of Spofforth’s was enough for me the second -innings. The best advice I can give is to watch every ball on a wicket -of that kind, and score when you can. - -In conclusion, never treat a straight ball with contempt, however badly -bowled. I have met with a ball that bounded twice or thrice before it -came to me, varying every bound and at the finish twisting or shooting, -and becoming a very difficult ball indeed. I have made it a rule all my -life to hit a straight long hop or full-pitch with a straight or nearly -straight bat, so that when a ball of this kind was bowled to me I had -the full length of my bat to play it with, whereas if I had tried to -pull or hit across at it, I should only have had the width of my bat, -and should have been more likely to miss it. - -When an indifferent bowler is put on, you cannot be too careful. He is -put on to tempt you to hit, and does not mind how many runs you score -off him; but presently you will get a good ball, and if you are not -careful, especially if you are trying to bring off a favourite stroke, -you will hit at it and very likely lose your wicket. - -After you have made a boundary hit do not make up your mind to hit -another off the next ball. - -Keep your eye on the bowler, watch how he holds the ball and runs up -to the wicket before delivering it; that will help you considerably to -detect alteration in length and pace. - -It is a mistake to hit at the pitch of slow, round, or under-hand -bowling. The twist is sure to beat you, and if you do not miss the -ball altogether, you will most likely get caught at cover-point. In my -younger days I always ran out to under-hand bowling and hit it before -it bounded, or waited and got it long hop. When a first-class bowler -tries to bowl a slow ball with an extra amount of break, look out for a -bad ball, and when it comes, as it will sooner or later, punish it, and -you will upset him a bit, and very likely prevent him from bowling good -balls afterwards. - -I think I have touched upon nearly everything that might help a young -player to a long score, and with just a word about playing against odds -I have done. Whether against eighteen or twenty-two in the field, play -the same game that you would against an eleven. I have very often found -that the fieldsmen in the outfield are placed too deep, and a second -run can be stolen after the ball passes the men close in. Do not hit to -leg, but rather place or snick the ball; you will get just as many runs -without the risk of being caught. It was when playing against odds that -fine placing to leg was first cultivated, and now it has to a great -extent superseded leg hitting. - -I need not say how delighted I am to watch the progress of every -young and rising cricketer. My heart is in the game I love above all -others, with a love that is as strong to-day as it was when I made my -first large score, and when eye, hand, and foot were much quicker than -they are now. I do not believe that there are no days like the good old -days of cricket, but I do strongly believe that the prospects of the -game are as bright and hopeful to-day as they have been at any time in -its history, and that in future years as great if not greater things -will be done with both bat and ball. I ask every young cricketer to -study the points I have submitted, and it will be sufficient reward to -me if they in some way help him to make a big score. - - - - -CHAPTER X. - -THE AUSTRALIANS. - -(BY A. G. STEEL.) - - -Not until Monday, May 27, 1878, did the English public take any real -interest in Australian cricket, though in 1877 in their own country the -Australians had defeated Lillywhite’s eleven on even terms. Prior to -this date four English teams had visited Australia, but their doings, -though recorded in the press, did not interest the cricket community -at home. The Australian players met with in the Colonies were no doubt -learning from the English teams they had seen and played against, but -the idea that they were up to the standard of English first-class -cricket seemed absurd; and to a certain extent this estimate was -justified by the records of the English visitors. In 1862 H. H. -Stephenson, Surrey player and huntsman, took out twelve professional -players to the Colonies under the auspices of Messrs. Spiers and Pond. -They played twelve matches against eighteens and twenty-twos, won six, -lost two, and drew four. In 1864, two years later, George Parr took -out a team, which played sixteen matches against twenty-twos, and was -not beaten at all. In 1873 Mr. W. G. Grace visited the antipodes at -the request of the Melbourne Cricket Club; his eleven played fifteen -matches, all against odds, won ten, lost three, and drew two. In -1876 James Lillywhite followed, and it was during this tour that the -Australians first won a match on equal terms. Lillywhite’s team played -Australia on March 15, 16 and 17, 1877, with the result that Australia -won by 45 runs. This match was noteworthy for another reason. C. -Bannerman made 165 for Australia, and was the first amongst Australian -batsmen to score a hundred against English bowlers. Now, though English -cricketers had been beaten on even terms as recently as 1877, the -fact seemed to have been lost sight of at home in 1878, and when the -first Australian eleven that ever visited England arrived early in the -latter year, it never occurred to anyone that it could have any chance -of actually storming the citadel of English cricket with success. On -May 27, 1878, English cricket and its lovers received a serious shock, -as on that day, in the extraordinarily short space of four and a half -hours, a very fair team of the M.C.C. were beaten by nine wickets. The -famous English club was certainly well represented, seeing that W. G. -Grace, A. W. Ridley, A. J. Webbe, A. N. Hornby, Shaw, and Morley did -battle for it. Gregory’s team, as the Australians were called, had a -very successful season, beating, in addition to M.C.C., Yorkshire, -Surrey, Middlesex, Leicestershire, Sussex, Gloucestershire, and a bad -eleven of the ‘Players,’ and being beaten by Nottingham, the Gentlemen -of England, Yorkshire, and Cambridge, the latter the most decisive -defeat of all. - -The British public were surprised at these results, especially as it -had expected so little from the visitors. Many of the lower classes -were so ignorant of Australia itself, to say nothing of the cricket -capabilities of its inhabitants, that they fully expected to find the -members of Gregory’s team black as the Aborigines. We remember the late -Rev. Arthur Ward ‘putting his foot into it’ on this subject before some -of the Australians. One day in the pavilion at Lord’s, the writer, -who had been chosen to represent the Gentlemen of England against the -visitors in a forthcoming match, was sitting beside Spofforth watching -a game, in which neither was taking part. Mr. Ward coming up, accosted -the writer, ‘Well, Mr. Steel, so I hear you are going to play against -the niggers on Monday?’ His face was a picture when Spofforth was -introduced to him as the ‘demon nigger bowler.’ Gregory’s team, in the -writer’s opinion, contained four really good bowlers: Spofforth, Boyle, -Allan, and Garrett, and two fair changes in Midwinter and Horan, but as -batsmen they were poor when compared with England’s best. - -Charles Bannerman was a most dashing player, his off-driving being -magnificent, and Horan and Murdoch were fairish batsmen. Murdoch then -was very different to the Murdoch of 1882 and 1884; but the rest -were rough and untutored, more like country cricketers than correct -players. Had this team come to England in a dry instead of a wet -season, it would probably have had a very different record at the end -of its visit. Spofforth, Boyle and Garrett were most deadly to the -best batsmen on the soft, caked wickets they so often had to assist -them; and the Australian batsmen, with the rough crossbat style which -distinguished the majority, were just as likely to knock up fifteen -to twenty runs on a bad wicket as on a good one. Nothing brings good -and bad batsmen so close together as bad wet seasons. When Cambridge -University met them the match was played on a hard true wicket, the -Australian bowling was thoroughly collared, and none of the eleven, -except Murdoch, C. Bannerman, and perhaps Horan, showed any signs of -being able to play correct cricket on a hard ground. - -Gregory’s team, however, had a wonderfully stimulating effect on -English cricket. Their record taught us that the Australians could -produce men to beat most of the counties, and who _might_, after a -year or two of experience, play a very good game with a picked team of -England. - -In 1880 W. L. Murdoch brought over a Colonial team to England. -The close of the season showed that in the eleven-a-side matches, -Derbyshire, Yorkshire, Gloucestershire, and a good eleven of the -Players of England had been beaten, while only two matches had been -lost: Nottingham succeeded in winning by one wicket, and England by -five wickets. This latter match was the first in which a picked team -of England did battle against the Australians, and the excitement was -intense. It was most interesting, and will be ever memorable for the -splendid innings of W. G. Grace and W. L. Murdoch, who made 152 and -153 respectively, the latter being not out. England’s first innings -was 420, Australia’s 149; the latter followed on, and when the last -man, W. H. Moule, came in there were still wanting 32 runs to save the -innings defeat. Moule played a stubborn game with his captain, and put -on 88 for the last wicket. How England lost five wickets on a goodish -wicket in getting 57 runs will never be forgotten. The writer had taken -off his cricket clothes at the end of the Australians’ second innings, -thinking all would soon be over; but cricket is a strange game, and he -soon had to put them on again. The result of the first pitched battle -between England and Australia, though a win of five wickets for the -former, was a marvellous performance on the part of the Australians; -indeed, seeing how far they were left behind on the first innings, it -was one of the best things ever done at cricket to get so near the -victors at the finish, especially as the wicket on the last innings was -not to be found fault with. It should also be mentioned in fairness to -the Australians that their best bowler, Spofforth, was prevented by an -accident from taking part in this match. - -The next team that visited England was in 1882, and was again under -the captaincy of W. L. Murdoch. On this occasion G. Giffen, S. P. -Jones, and H. H. Massie were introduced to the British public for the -first time. As this eleven succeeded in defeating England, and was -perhaps the best that ever represented the Colonies, we record the -names:--A. C. Bannerman, J. M. Blackham, G. J. Bonnor, H. F. Boyle, -P. S. McDonnell, W. L. Murdoch, G. E. Palmer, F. R. Spofforth, T. W. -Garrett, T. Horan, and the three new players above mentioned. The -result at the end of the season was: Matches played, 38: won, 23; lost, -4; drawn, 11; Nottingham beaten once, Lancashire once, Yorkshire three -times, the Gentlemen of England once, and Oxford University once. The -four defeats were by Cambridge University, the Players of England, -Cambridge Past and Present, and the North of England. This team played -the second pitched battle between Australia and England on Monday, -August 28, and after the close finish and creditable display made in -1880 against England by worse players, the match created the most -intense excitement. The Australians went first to the wickets, which -were very sticky, and were all disposed of for 63. England topped this -by 38. Prior to the beginning of Australia’s second innings, a heavy -shower deluged the ground. Going in on the wet cutting-through wicket, -Massie hit the incapacitated bowlers all over the field, and when the -first wicket fell for 66 had scored 55 out of that number. With the -exception of Murdoch and Bannerman, nobody else troubled the English -bowlers, and the ground rapidly drying and caking, the whole side were -disposed of for 122. The Englishmen wanted 85 to win, and when the -score was at 51 for one wicket, it seemed as if the game were over. -Spofforth, however, was bowling splendidly, and the wicket had become -most difficult. He was bowling over medium pace, coming back many -inches, and often getting up to an uncomfortable height. The English -batsmen could do nothing with him, and, after the keenest excitement, -the game ended in a well-won victory for the Australians by 7 runs. -Though this defeat was a great blow to the English representatives, -there were none who grudged Australia her success, which was obtained -by sound and sterling cricket. We think there is no doubt that the -1882 team was better than the next one in 1884. In 1882 they had as -bowlers Boyle, Spofforth, Palmer, Garrett, and Giffen; in 1884 they -had Spofforth, Palmer, Boyle, Giffen, and Midwinter, but they had lost -Garrett. The ’82 team contained two excellent batsmen in Horan and -Massie, whose absence was not sufficiently compensated for by Scott and -Midwinter. Murdoch, Horan, Giffen, Blackham, were all likely to make -runs, while Massie, Bonnor, and McDonnell often succeeded on the worst -wicket in making mincemeat of any bowling. - -In 1884 W. L. Murdoch again brought over an Australian team to -England, and played thirty-two matches, winning eight and losing seven. -This time it was decided by the English authorities not to allow the -fame of English cricket to depend on the result of one match only, but -on the best of three, and accordingly three matches were arranged to -be played between England and Australia, one at Manchester, the second -at Lord’s, and the third at the Oval. The first, at Manchester, was -seriously interfered with by the weather. Rain prevented any play on -the first day. England began to bat on a sodden wicket and made 95, -and Murdoch’s team responded with 182. England had now a difficult -task to prevent being beaten, but at the end of the match were 92 -runs on, and one wicket to fall. This was doubtless a draw in favour -of the Australians, but still a hundred runs on a bad wicket against -the flower of English bowling take a lot of getting, and it must be -remembered that a month before the Australian team were all disposed -of for 60 on a sticky wicket by Peate and Emmett. The second match -was at Lord’s, and was the only one of the three that was finished. -England won easily by an innings and 5 runs. The earlier teams of the -Australians never appeared to advantage at Lord’s. The later ones, -however, have done better on that ground. The third match, at the Oval, -was a memorable one. The Australians won the toss, went in on a perfect -wicket, and made the terrific score of 551: McDonnell 103, Murdoch 211, -Scott 102. This was a truly great performance, and it was remarkable -that every member of the English team tried his hand with the ball, -by far the most successful having been the Honourable A. Lyttelton -with the analysis of four wickets for 19 runs. England made 346 first -innings, in which was a magnificent display from W. W. Read of 117. In -the second innings England made 85 for two wickets, and thus required -120 runs on a true wicket with seven good batsmen to save the single -innings defeat. - -The next team that visited England was in 1886, H. J. H. Scott being -the captain. This is memorable as the first Australian team in England -that did not contain W. L. Murdoch. Several unknown men now made their -appearance, W. Bruce, E. Evans, J. McIlwraith, and J. W. Trumble, but -this was undoubtedly less successful than any of the previous teams. -Their season’s record showed: Matches played, 38; won, 9; lost, 7; -drawn, 22. Here again, as in 1884, England _v._ Australia was to be -played at Manchester, Lord’s, and the Oval; but it is unnecessary to -give an account of these three matches. It will suffice to say that at -Manchester England won by four wickets, at Lord’s by an innings and 106 -runs, and at the Oval by an innings and 217 runs. - -The sixth Australian team visited us in 1888, and as W. L. Murdoch -had at that time practically retired from first-class cricket, the -captaincy devolved upon that sterling hitter, P. S. McDonnell. This -team, though including some excellent players at all branches of the -game, cannot be considered equal in merit to that of 1882. Three -representative matches were again arranged, as in 1886. The first was -played at Lord’s upon a wicket deluged with rain, and the Australians -won in a small-scoring match by 61 runs. They won on their merits as -the game was played, and the English batsmen on that occasion deserved -to lose. On a most difficult wicket, and against C. T. B. Turner and J. -J. Ferris’s bowling, they poked and scraped about, and seemed utterly -unable to realise what each Australian batsman had done, viz. that to -make runs under such circumstances the bat must be used vigorously. -Though the Australians here scored their second success since 1878 in -England in a representative match, the supporters of England were in -nowise satisfied that the Australians had the better side. Two really -good bowlers their opponents had in Turner and Ferris, but no one -else on their side had any pretensions to being called first-class -in this department of the game. Their batting, taken as a whole, was -weak--McDonnell, of course, was a fine player, but the rest could not -be compared to our best English batsmen. Then their fielding was hardly -up to the standard of previous colonial teams. Altogether the English -side did not fear the result of the next two matches if played under -ordinary conditions of weather and luck. The second match, at the -Oval, resulted in a win for England by an innings and 137 runs, and -the third, played at Manchester, in another win for the same side by -an innings and 21 runs. The feature of the season’s cricket played by -this side was the bowling of C. T. B. Turner and J. J. Ferris. Turner’s -analysis was remarkable--314 wickets for 3,492 runs, giving the -excellent average of 11·38. This bowler is undoubtedly entitled to take -rank amongst the really great bowlers of this generation of cricketers. -J. J. Ferris, though he met with wonderful success this season (1888), -was never in the same class as C. T. B. Turner. - -The next Australian team that came to England was in 1890, and W. -L. Murdoch, after five years’ absence from first-class cricket, -consented to once again act as captain. The result of this trip was -anything but a success from a cricket point of view, and indeed the -team was not competent to cope with England’s best. Six of this team -made their first visit to England, viz. Messrs. Charlton, Gregory, -Walters, Barrett, H. Trumble, and Burn. The batting of this team was -distinctly indifferent, though Murdoch showed on occasions he had not -altogether lost his skill; he was not, however, the Murdoch of 1882. -Messrs. Turner and Ferris again bore the brunt of the attack; they -each took the same number of wickets during the tour, viz. 215. The -former’s average was slightly the better of the two; how, in view -of Ferris’s performances since 1890 in England, he managed to run -Turner so close for the highest bowling honours will always remain a -mystery. The first of the three representative matches England won by -seven wickets at Lord’s. The feature of this match was that, though -the Australians made 132 and 176 and the English team 173 and 137 for -3 wickets, there was not one bye scored to either side in the match. -This is a wonderful testimonial to J. M. Blackham and G. McGregor, the -respective wicket-keepers for Australia and England. The second match -England _v._ Australia was played at the Oval, and a good game resulted -in the defeat of the latter by two wickets; it was a close finish, and -the Australians deserved great credit for so nearly defeating such a -powerful side as represented England on that occasion. The third match, -arranged to be played at Manchester, was never even begun owing to the -incessant rain which deluged the ground on all three days. - -In 1893 the eighth Australian eleven came over, and carried with it -great hopes of their own countrymen. It had some good batsmen--Trott, -Lyons, Bannerman, Giffen, Bruce, Graham, and Gregory, but none of -them except Giffen could then compare with the best English bats, and -Giffen, for some reason, has never done himself justice as a batsman -in any of these trips. The bowlers were Turner, H. Trumble, Giffen, -R. McLeod, Trott, and Bruce. Giffen at times bowled very finely, and -Turner bowled well, but not so successfully as of yore. H. Trumble also -proved himself to be an excellent bowler, but the combination was not -strong enough, especially in a fine season, to win the rubber against -England. Unfortunately only one of the three matches was finished, and -this resulted in a win for England by an innings and 43 runs. - -In 1896 the ninth eleven that visited England, under the leadership of -Trott, proved a good side, far the best that had been over since 1884, -and from this date the efficiency of Australian cricket began to rise, -until at the time of writing (April 1898) it stands as high as it ever -did. Before discussing this eleven it will be well briefly to review -the result of five remarkable test matches played in Australia in the -winter of 1895 and 1896 between Stoddart’s eleven and the Australians. -Stoddart’s eleven was very good, but nobody could say that at that -time it was the best that England could have sent. Grace, Jackson, -Gunn, Storer, and Abel might with advantage have taken the places of -Humphreys, Brockwell, Philipson, Briggs, and Lockwood; but still it was -a good team, and it won three out of the five test matches. - -Under any circumstances this must always remain a great feat, for each -side possess a great advantage when playing in their own country, but -on looking carefully into these five matches as a whole, it must be -confessed that Stoddart must have been greatly helped by the selection -and captaincy of the Colonists. Giffen’s view of his duties of captain -was the very erroneous one that it was essential that he should be -bowling at one end nearly the whole time. In the first match he bowled -118 overs, while Turner and Jones were only allowed to bowl 117 overs -between them. In the second match he magnanimously did not go on in the -first innings on a wet wicket, but made up for it by bowling 23 more -overs than anyone else in the second innings, and in the last match he -bowled while 236 runs were scored off him, and H. Trumble, who was on -all wickets the best bowler in Australia, was only selected to play -in one of the matches. Stoddart’s side, however, batted finely, and -Richardson proved himself at that time to be far the best bowler in the -world. - -When they came to England in 1896 they brought Giffen, but wisely made -Trott captain, and Hill and Darling showed symptoms of developing into -the very high position they now hold, and the whole eleven proved -themselves a difficult side to get out. Gregory, Darling, Hill, -Iredale, Trott, Giffen, and Donnan all scored a thousand runs in the -season, and Trumble, Jones, McKibbin, and Giffen each secured over a -hundred wickets, and H. Trumble on all wickets was not excelled by any -bowler in the two countries. The eleven played a safe game; there was -no McDonnell or Lyons in the side, but they took a lot of getting out, -though, as might be supposed in the case of a side where there was no -hitter, they were weak on soft wickets. - -Such was the situation when the last disastrous visit of Stoddart’s -eleven took place in 1897 and 1898, and though the result of this tour -is very recent history, it is so important and raises such misgivings -for the future that it is well to consider it at some length. - -In the first place no eleven has ever left England with so much of -their countrymen’s confidence as this eleven of Stoddart’s. A great -many thought that it was absolutely the best selection that could have -been made. It is easy to be wise after the event, but even now it is -not at all certain that the bowling could be improved, and this was -the notorious weak spot of the eleven. In another part of this work is -given a possible first eleven of England, but this selection is given, -as far as the bowlers are concerned, with no great confidence, and the -truth must sadly be confessed that unless we mend our bowling ways we -shall very likely be defeated in our own country by the Australians in -1899. Up to the end of the first test match Stoddart’s eleven had a -blaze of triumph in spite of the abnormal heat which knocked up more -than one of our eleven. Stoddart had no doubt the worst of the luck -in losing the toss three times in the first four test matches, but, -unluckily, what many of us dreaded occurred in the last match--he won -the toss and lost the match. MacLaren and Ranjitsinhji batted grandly, -Storer, Hayward, and Druce passably, but the rest proved more or less a -failure, while on Australian wickets against weak English bowling the -batting of Darling and Hill was superb, and that of C. McLeod, Gregory, -Iredale, Trumble, and Trott very good. But our team as a whole were not -strong enough in batting to make up for our bowling weakness, and in a -word the Australians thoroughly outbowled us. - -The Australians in the first test match played the bowlers who had -performed so well in England in 1896, with the addition of C. McLeod, -but in subsequent matches they played Noble and Howell, and these two -bowlers have the knack of variety in their bowling, and this, combined -with the pace of Jones and the admirable steadiness and break of -Trumble, made a combination of bowlers that on good hard wickets has -never been surpassed. It is the future that troubles us; where are our -bowlers? In old days we could get one first-class bowler a year out of -Nottingham alone, but the supply seems to have come to an end; but from -somewhere must come some bowlers of variety of pace, break, and head, -or the old country must be content to take the lower room. But if 1899 -should turn out to be a wet year a very different tale may have to be -told. - -Taking both countries, and excluding the Manchester match in 1890, -abandoned on account of weather, fifty-one test matches have now been -played, of which England has won twenty-six, fourteen in Australia and -twelve at home, Australia nineteen, of which all but three were in -Australia, and six have been drawn. - -The leading averages in batting in all the series, in both countries, -of test matches from 1880 to 1898 inclusive may prove of interest at -this stage, but of course we exclude the players who only played in -comparatively few matches, and we limit the number of innings to a -minimum of twelve. The averages are as follows:-- - - +--------------------+---------+-----------+------------+---------+ - | | No. of | Times not | | | - | Batsmen | Innings | out | Total runs | Average | - +--------------------+---------+-----------+------------+---------+ - |K. S. Ranjitsinhji | 12 | 2 | 692 | 57·8 | - |F. A. Iredale | 18 | 0 | 705 | 39·3 | - |C. Hill | 12 | 0 | 467 | 38·11 | - |A. Shrewsbury | 36 | 4 | 1,277 | 35·17 | - |A. E. Stoddart | 28 | 2 | 996 | 35·16 | - |A. C. MacLaren | 22 | 2 | 769 | 34·16 | - |A. G. Steel | 17 | 3 | 586 | 34·8 | - |W. G. Grace | 32 | 4 | 1,079 | 33·23 | - |W. L. Murdoch | 27 | 3 | 885 | 32·21 | - +--------------------+---------+-----------+------------+---------+ - -Like all tables of averages the above is misleading. Players like -Grace, Murdoch, and Shrewsbury played in the days when runs were not -so easily got, and their performances may rank on a par with those of -MacLaren, Ranjitsinhji, and Hill, and, of course, there have been many -innings played against equally good bowling, but not in matches of -England _v_ Australia. No innings of greater merit has, however, been -played than Murdoch’s innings of 153 not out against England at the -Oval in 1880. - -[Illustration: THE CRITICS] - -With regard to the merits of the English and Australian bowlers, we -think there are few English cricketers who would deny that Spofforth -is the best bowler ever seen on English grounds, at any rate in modern -times, and yet the statistics show that he is not at the head of the -average list. - -The following is the list of the first twelve bowlers:-- - - +--------------+-------+------+---------+---------+ - | | Balls | Runs | Wickets | Average | - +--------------+-------+------+---------+---------+ - |Lohmann | 2,861 | 875| 61 | 14 | - |Peel | 4,891 | 1,715| 101 | 16 | - |Turner | 4,423 | 1,510| 84 | 17 | - |Spofforth | 4,137 | 1,714| 93 | 18 | - |Boyle | 1,620 | 598| 30 | 19 | - |Briggs | 3,403 | 1,569| 76 | 20 | - |Hearne | 1,732 | 761| 35 | 20 | - |Palmer | 4,463 | 1,678| 78 | 21 | - |Richardson | 4,017 | 2,221| 88 | 25 | - |Giffen | 5,962 | 2,793| 103 | 26 | - |Trumble | 2,723 | 1,213| 47 | 26 | - |Jones | 1,537 | 850| 29 | 29 | - +--------------+-------+------+---------+---------+ - -Spofforth, although fourth only in the above table, was on the whole -the greatest bowler, for many of his great feats were performed in -other almost as important matches, and it must also be remembered -that he never bowled for maidens; but the figures of Peel, who in -test matches has bowled more balls than anybody, come up remarkably -well, and considering the number of balls he bowled his record is an -extraordinary one. - -In addition to Spofforth, the Australians have had a wonderfully good -lot of bowlers: Palmer, Garrett, Boyle, Allan, Evans, G. Giffen, and -since 1886--when this chapter was first written--Turner, Ferris, and -H. Trumble, and, as far as can be gathered from the disastrous tour of -Mr. Stoddart’s eleven in 1897–8, Noble, Howell, and Jones. Although the -previous remarks about Spofforth were written before Turner made such -a wonderful record on our English grounds, we still think Spofforth -the best of all the bowlers. It appears extraordinary at first sight -that a country whose whole population does not exceed that of London -should in the course of a few years have been able to develop such -exceptional talent. We believe, however, that Australia will always -possess excellent bowlers, for the following reason. In Melbourne, -Sydney, and Adelaide, the chief nurseries of Australian cricket, the -grounds are so excellent, and usually so hard and fast, that no bowler -can possibly expect the slightest amount of success unless he possesses -some peculiarity of style or action, pace or power, over the ball; mere -pace and accuracy are of no avail. On the hardest and best wickets it -must be laid down as an axiom that bowlers with change of pace and turn -must form the bowling backbone of the future best eleven, and these -qualities the young Australian cultivates with greater success than the -English. In England the conditions are different, as, by reason of our -variable climate, naturally weak bowling often becomes most effective. -Young Australian bowlers have also ample opportunity for gaining -experience and developing their skill, as there is in the colonies a -very great dearth of the professional element. Members of the same club -have to rely for their batting practice on the bowling of one another, -and their bowlers come to acquire some of the peculiarities above -mentioned that will strike terror into the hearts of their opponents in -the next tie of the cup contests. These cup contests in Australia are -an excellent institution, as professionalism is barred. They produce -the greatest interest and excitement, and each club does its utmost -to secure the much-coveted distinction of being premier club for the -season. The Australian climate is a great aid to bowling and fielding. -Its warmth and mildness prevent the rheumatic affections that so often -attack the arms and shoulders of our players, and the Australians -consequently retain their suppleness of limb and activity of youth -longer than their English cousins. Nothing illustrates this better -than the prevalence of good throwing amongst Australian fieldsmen. The -every-day sight on our own grounds of a man who has thrown his arm -out and can do nothing but jerk is almost unknown in Australia; even -colonials who have passed their cricket prime and have reached the age -of thirty-eight or forty can still throw with much the same dash as of -old. In our county teams we find a woeful deficiency in this essential -to good fielding; the cold and damp of our northern climate having -penetrated into the bones and created a chronic and incurable stiffness. - -One occasionally hears a really good cricket story in Australia. The -following was vouched for as a fact by several leading members of -Australian cricket, and was told me as illustrative of the skill and -dash of some great fieldsman whom I have never had the good fortune to -meet. This man was standing coverpoint one day--his usual place in the -field. He was marvellously quick, sometimes indeed his returns were so -smart that none could tell whether he had used his right or left arm. -He was, however, apt at times to be sleepy and inattentive to the game. -On one occasion he was in this state, and just as the bowler started -to bowl he noticed his sleepy coverpoint standing looking on the -ground with his back to the wickets. ‘Hulloa, there, wake up!’ shouted -he. Quick as lightning turned the coverpoint, and seeing something -dark dashing past him made a dart, and caught, not the ball as he had -thought, but a swallow. Talk of Royle or Briggs after that! - -Writing at the close of Mr. Stoddart’s disastrous tour, it must be -said that if the Australians bring over a representative team in 1899 -it will be looked forward to with the keenest interest. The 1896 lot -did very well, and it remains to be seen whether in 1899, in matches -limited to three days and on English wickets, our visitors can pull -off the rubber in the three test matches. If they do they will receive -the hearty congratulations of every true English cricketer; and at the -present time of writing it looks as if they had a great chance of so -doing, but if they are wise they will try and unearth another batsman -of the stamp of McDonnell or Lyons. - - - - -CHAPTER XI. - -THE UNIVERSITY CRICKET MATCH. - -(BY THE HON. R. H. LYTTELTON.) - - -If to play drawn matches be a constant reproach against certain -elevens, neither University eleven can be blamed on this score. -Sixty-three matches have been begun between these old rivals, and no -fewer than sixty have been finished. Of the three drawn matches, one, -the first ever played, was confined to one day only; the second was -so long ago as 1844, and that was confined to two days; whilst the -third, in 1888, was played in such unfavourable weather that not even -four days sufficed to finish the match. All the rest have been fought -out to the end, and of the sixty completed matches Cambridge has won -thirty-two times and Oxford twenty-eight; thus Cambridge has a proud -balance of four in its favour. All the matches except five have been -played at Lord’s; the remaining five were played at Oxford, three -on the Magdalen ground, one on Cowley Marsh, and one on Bullingdon -Green. The dark blues appear to have been slightly favoured in this -respect--for presumably they knew their way about Oxford grounds better -than their rivals--and out of the five matches played at Oxford, -Cambridge only succeeded in winning one. The rules of qualification -to play in this match are now strict only in one particular, and -that is that nobody is allowed to play more than four times. Several -players have played five matches, and their names are: C. H. Ridding, -A. Ridding, C. D. Marsham, and R. D. Walker, all Oxford men. The fact -that some players play on a side for five years may constitute a slight -reason for causing the side they assist to lose matches and not win -them; but during the last three years that Mr. R. D. Walker helped his -University he also helped the Gentlemen of England in their annual -matches against the Players both at Lord’s and at the Oval; and C. D. -Marsham was certainly not excelled by any gentleman bowler for accuracy -and general efficiency during all the years he played for Oxford. -Oxford were strong all the five years he played, and won four out of -the five matches; the other match resulted in a victory for Cambridge, -mainly owing to the performances, both in batting and bowling, of the -famous Mr. J. Makinson. Not since 1865, however, when Mr. R. D. Walker -last played for Oxford, has any cricketer played more than four times, -and since that time the rule has been well established, limiting the -period to four years. But there is considerable elasticity allowed in -permitting players to represent their University within those four -years. A residence for a week is apparently sufficient, provided that -the man’s name is kept on the books of some College or Hall. Mr. -O’Brien, who represented Oxford in 1884 and 1885, resided for one -summer at New Inn Hall and never went near his University again, but -if he had chosen and had been selected he might have played for the -full term of four years. Mr. Leslie, after residing at Oxford for one -year, went into business in London, but played three years for Oxford, -and till his last year performed yeoman’s service. In 1856, Makinson’s -year, Mr. T. W. Wills, with the concurrence and sanction of Oxford, -played for Cambridge without ever having resided at Cambridge for one -single day, though his name was entered on the College books. However, -his part in the match consisted of getting five runs in one innings and -bowling nine overs for one wicket. It appears very clear, then, that -Oxford have profited by having five matches played on their own ground -and making use, for five years, of Mr. C. D. Marsham, the best bowler -they ever possessed, to say nothing of Mr. R. D. Walker. - -Of course the characteristics of University cricket have changed very -much, following the example of cricket generally. About the first match -of all the late Bishop of St. Andrews (Bishop Wordsworth), who played -in it, very kindly wrote the following note:-- - - THE FIRST INTER-UNIVERSITY CRICKET MATCH.--1827. - - In the newly published Life of my younger brother Christopher, the - late Bishop of Lincoln, the following words are to be found, quoted - from his private journal:--‘Friday’ (no date--but early in June, - 1826). ‘Heard from Charles. He wishes that Oxford and Cambridge should - play a match at cricket’ (p. 46). And as I have been asked to put - upon paper what I can remember concerning the first Inter-University - Cricket Match, with a view to its insertion in the present volume, - I venture to take those words for my text. Yes; I was then in my - Freshman’s year at Christ Church, and both my brother and I--he - at Winchester, and I at Harrow--had been in our respective school - elevens. But more than this, as captain of the Harrow Eleven I had - enjoyed what was then a novel experience in carrying on correspondence - with brother captains at other public schools--Eton, Winchester, Rugby - and even Charter House; and I well remember how the last amused us at - Harrow, by the pompous and, as we presumed to think, bumptious style - of his letter, proposing ‘to determine the superiority at cricket - which has been so long undecided.’ Having played against Eton for four - years, from the first match in 1822 to 1825, and in the first match - against Winchester in the last-named year, I had a large acquaintance - among cricketers who had gone off from those schools and from Harrow - to both Universities. My brother, as I have said, was one of these, - but though successful in the Wykehamist Eleven at Lord’s in 1825 - (when he got 35 runs in his second innings, and ‘caught’ our friend - Henry Manning--the future cardinal--of which he was wont to boast in - after years), he did not keep up his cricket at Cambridge, whereas I - continued to keep up mine at Oxford and was in the University Eleven - during the whole time of my undergraduate course. Nothing came of - my ‘wish’ to bring about a match between the Universities in 1826. - But in 1827 the proposal was carried into effect. Though an Oxford - man, my home was at Cambridge, my father being Master of Trinity; - and this gave me opportunities for communicating with men of that - University, many of whom remained up for the vacations, or for part of - the vacations, especially at Easter. I remember calling upon Barnard - of King’s, who had been captain of an Eton Eleven against whom I had - played, and who was now one of the foremost Cambridge cricketers, and - he gave me reason to fear that no King’s man would be able to play at - the time proposed (early in June), though that time would be within - the Cambridge vacation and not within ours, because their men, at - King’s, were kept up longer than at the other Colleges. And this, I - believe, proved actually the case; and if so, some allowance should - be made for it. But the fact is, there were similar difficulties on - both sides, and I am not sure they were not as great or greater upon - ours. In those ante-railway days it was necessary to get permission - from the College authorities to go up to London in term time, and - the permission was not readily granted. To take my own case:--My - conscience still rather smites me when I remember that in order to - gain my end, I had to present myself to the Dean and tell him that I - wished to be allowed to go to London--not to play a game of cricket - (that would not have been listened to)--but to consult a dentist; a - piece of Jesuitry which was _understood_, I believe, equally well on - both sides; at all events my tutor, Longley--afterwards Archbishop of - Canterbury--was privy to it. - - Thus, though not without difficulties, the match came on, but - unhappily, the weather presenting a fresh difficulty, it did not fully - go off. We could only play a single innings; with the result which the - score shows. The precise day in June on which it was played has been - disputed. One report gives the 4th; another states that ‘the match - did not take place on the 4th as intended, but was deferred for a few - days.’ I can only say that I do not remember any postponement, as I - think I should do had such been the case; and what is more, ‘a few - days’ later would have brought it within our vacation, and so would - have rendered my piece of Jesuitism unnecessary. The players on the - Cambridge side were mostly Etonians, though there was, I think, no - King’s man among them; and on the Oxford side, mostly Wykehamists. We - scored 258 runs to our opponents’ 92, but it cannot be said we were a - strong eleven. The bowling was divided between Bayley and me; and the - state of the ground being in my favour, I was singularly successful - with my left-hand twist from the off, bringing down no less than seven - wickets in the one innings for only 25 runs. Jenner, famous as a - wicket-keeper, and well known afterwards as Sir Herbert Jenner Fust, - was the only batsman who made any stand against it. He had learnt by - painful experience how to deal with it. We had been antagonists in - the Eton and Harrow match of 1822; and I can well remember even now, - though it is 66 years ago, his look of ineffable disgust and dismay - when I had pitched a ball some four or five inches wide to the off, - and he had shouldered his bat meaning to punish it as it rose by a - smart cut to point, the tortuous creature shot in obliquely and took - his middle stump, when he had only got two runs. Precisely the same - happened again in his second innings, only then he got no runs at all. - Again in Eton v. Harrow 1823 I had bowled him at 7. And yet he was - considered the best bat on the Eton side next to Barnard. He now made - 47 runs, while no one else on the Cambridge side scored more than 8. - He was also successful as a bowler, taking five wickets, mine included - (against which he had a very strong claim), though I do not remember - that he had much reputation in that line; and certainly upon the whole - the Cambridge bowling must have been very indifferent to allow some of - our men to run up the scores which stand to their names. - - Though often successful as a bowler (left-handed, under-hand), batting - (right-handed) was, if I may be bold to say so, my _forte_. In 1828, - the next year after this match, my average, upwards of 40, was higher - than that of any other in the Oxford eleven. I mention this with the - less compunction because in the second Inter-University match my name - appears without a run in either innings, and I wish to state how - the failure is to be accounted for. In that year, 1829, the first - Inter-University boatrace took place at Henley, and I was one of - the eight. As boating and cricket were then carried on in the same - (summer) term, and the race and the match were both to come off in the - same week, I wished to resign my place in the eleven. But this was not - allowed. I had therefore no alternative but to make my appearance and - do my best, though I had not played once before during the season, and - though I was suffering from the effects of my rowing in a way which - made it almost impossible for me to hold a bat. However, though I got - no runs, I was so far of use that I bowled two, and caught two of our - opponents; and we won the match, not quite so triumphantly as in 1827 - (if a ‘drawn’ match can be so described), but quite easily enough, as - we had won the boatrace quite ‘easily’ two days before, Wednesday, - June 10th. - - Of the players in the two elevens, who contended at Lord’s more than - 60 years ago, five--if not six--I believe, are still living. Who shall - say how much the lengthening of their days beyond the ordinary span of - our existence here is to be attributed to ‘Cricket’s manly toil’? - - I have now done the best I could to comply with the request made to - me as an old cricketer, and if I have been garrulous, and if I have - been egotistical, I can fairly plead, that this is no more than was - to be expected when an ultra-octogenarian was applied to for his - reminiscences. - - CHARLES WORDSWORTH. - - ST. ANDREWS: _May 16, 1888_. - -In the match of 1827, Oxford, strange to relate, got a total of 258 -runs, and exactly realised 200 runs in the third match in 1836, while -Cambridge got 287 runs in the fifth match in 1839; but from 1839 to -1851, when Cambridge scored 266 runs, there was no innings played by -either side which resulted in 200 runs, and this notwithstanding the -gigantic number of extras that were sometimes given. Cambridge in -1841 won by 8 runs, but scored in the two innings 56 by extras. In -1842 Cambridge again won by 162 runs, and scored 81 by extras; while -Oxford in 1843 gained 65 by extras, losing the match, however, by 54 -runs. After 1851 scores of 200 runs and over became more frequent, and -still extras formed a formidable item in the various totals. Cambridge -gave 34 extras out of a total of 273 in 1852, or 1 run in every 8; and -Oxford in the same year gave Cambridge 40 extras out of a total of 196, -or an average of a little under 1 in every 5. We have made a careful -comparison showing the different totals and the percentage of extras, -and have found the following remarkable fact: in the first twenty-six -matches the total of runs scored came to 11,192, the number of extras -amounted to 1,767, making the percentage of extras to runs amount to a -little over 1 to 6. In the thirty-four succeeding matches 21,364 runs -were scored and 1351 extras, reducing the proportion to 1 to 15. In -other words, for the first twenty-six matches extras constituted 16 per -cent. of the total amount scored, while during the thirty succeeding -years they only amount to 6 per cent. - -As might be expected, the weak point in University cricket is the -bowling, and the tendency of modern Inter-University matches is an -undue largeness of scores, though when the improved condition of the -wickets is taken into account, there exists some ground for hoping -that University bowling is better than it was ten years ago. But when -the fact is considered that young amateurs in the prime of life play -every year on frequently perfect wickets, it is rather surprising that -the scoring is not even larger. That it is not so is chiefly owing -to nerve, that grand disturbing element in all cricket calculations. -It is far the most important contest of the year for all the players -concerned, and if you were to ask any University cricketer which match -or matches he felt most was hoped of him he would certainly quote the -Inter-University matches he took part in. It is a match, therefore, -famous for wrecking the reputation of batsmen. Still one may be allowed -to hope that amateur bowling may improve, as amateur wicket-keeping has -done. Since 1880 Cambridge has had as real good bowlers Messrs. Steel, -Studd, Rock, Woods, Jackson, and for one year Mr. Wells, while Oxford, -in our judgment, has during the same period turned out only three -really good bowlers, Messrs. Evans, Berkeley, and Cunliffe, and for one -year Bardswell. - -These ten good bowlers may be compared with the greatest in former -days--Messrs. C. D. Marsham, Traill, Maitland, Fellowes, Kenney, and -Butler of Oxford, and Lang, Salter, Plowden, Pelham, and Powys of -Cambridge, who were all fast except Maitland, Pelham, and Plowden; -while only three of the later lot of ten, Messrs. Woods, Evans, and -Jackson, were fast, the other seven being slow or medium. - -No fewer than eighty-three men have played four matches; and it is -curious to notice that out of these eighty-three there are only one -Oxford man and three Cambridge men who have played in four winning -elevens. The three Cambridge men are Messrs. T. A. Anson, W. Mills, and -W. de St. Croix; and the one Oxford man is Mr. S. C. Voules. Mr. Voules -played in the four winning elevens of 1863, ’64, ’65, and ’66, Messrs. -T. A. Anson and W. de St. Croix played in the four winning elevens of -1839, ’40, ’41, and ’42, and Mr. W. Mills played in 1840, ’41, ’42, -and ’43. Two unfortunate Cambridge men had the bad luck to play four -losing matches--namely, Messrs. R. D. Balfour and G. H. Tuck, in the -years 1863, ’64, ’65, and ’66. So far no Oxford man has had this fate. -Cambridge once won five consecutive matches, and on two occasions they -have won four, while Oxford has twice won four consecutive matches. As -may be expected, the runs scored by the more recent batsmen altogether -exceed the earlier players’ efforts. Up to 1870, when Mr. Yardley made -the first hundred, Mr. Bullock’s 78 for Oxford, obtained in 1858, was -the highest individual score, and the highest individual aggregates in -any one match are 92 in 1849 by Mr. R. T. King, 95 by Mr. Makinson in -1856, 90 by Mr. Mitchell in 1862, 92 by the same gentleman in 1865, -and 103 by Mr. C. E. Green in 1868. One of Mr. King’s innings was not -completed. So Mr. Yardley in 1870 beat the record of any two aggregates -by his one innings, except Mr. Green’s innings in 1868. Since 1870 the -individual scores of 100 have come fast and furious, and altogether -twenty hundreds have been played, nine by Cambridge to eleven by -Oxford. Mr. Yardley is still in the proud position of being the only -batsman who has twice got into three figures, and nobody who saw either -of his great performances will ever forget it. Unless, however, there -is a change for the better in bowling or an alteration in the laws, -it is certain that hundreds will come with comparative frequency, and -we cannot help pining for a return to the old state of things when -200 was reckoned a very large total. The highest aggregate in any one -match is Mr. Jardine’s 179 in 1892, and the highest individual score is -Mr. Key’s 143 in 1886. No performances are, however, entitled to more -credit than Mr. Makinson’s aggregate of 95 in 1856, and Mr. Mitchell’s -90 in 1862, and the fewer long scores made in former days made a far -larger proportion of the total runs obtained by the whole side. Mr. -Makinson’s runs in 1855 were obtained against perhaps the best bowling -eleven that Oxford ever possessed, containing Messrs. C. D. Marsham, A. -Payne, W. Fellowes, and W. Fiennes, while Mr. Mitchell’s score in 1862 -was not much less than half of the total score of his side. Against -him are to be found the names of Plowden, Lang, Salter, and Lyttelton, -and never in any match, except in the previous year when they had the -same quartet, has Cambridge been so strong in bowling as they were in -1862. The highest average has been secured by Mr. Key of Oxford, and -this amounts to no less than 49. Close behind him comes Mr. Wright of -Cambridge, with an average of 48·4; then Mr. Mitchell with 42·4, and -Mr. Yardley with 39·5. Mr. Mitchell’s average is remarkable, as his -highest score was 57, though he was once not out. Mr. Wright was twice -not out, Mr. Key and Mr. Mitchell once each; Mr. Yardley, however, was -always got out in the end. In estimating these averages we are only -reckoning the players who represented their University for four years. - -The earlier bowlers, as far as wickets are a guide, carry all before -them. Not until the twentieth match, played in 1854--Mr. C. D. -Marsham’s first year--was any analysis kept. To judge, however, by -the standard of wickets, Mr. G. E. Yonge of Oxford, who in four years -obtained thirty-nine wickets, Mr. E. W. Blore and Mr. Sayres, both of -Cambridge, who in the same time got thirty-two, are entitled to the -highest place. - -Naturally enough, as Mr. Marsham played five years and was also the -best bowler on the whole that Oxford ever turned out, most wickets -fell to his share. He got forty wickets at a cost of 361 runs--that -is to say, of only 9 runs a wicket--a great performance under any -circumstances. Two wides only were scored against Mr. Marsham, and -there is no record of a ‘no ball.’ He bowled a strictly orthodox -round-arm of fast medium pace, and generally round the wicket. - -Mr. E. M. Kenney was a very fast and dangerous left-hand bowler, most -terrifying to a nervous batsman, for he delivered that unpleasant sort -of ball which pursues the batsman, and is apt, to adopt a pugilistic -metaphor, to get in heavily on the ribs. During the three years that -Mr. Makinson played for Cambridge he took twenty-one wickets at a cost -of 194 runs, or just 9 runs a wicket; and when it is remembered that he -was also distinctly the best bat in the two elevens each of the three -years he played, it may be safely assumed that, as an all-round man, -he has never had a superior, with the exception of Mr. A. G. Steel. -At the same time it must be admitted that in bowling he was quite as -successful against Oxford as his merits justified. - -The famous Cambridge fast bowler, Mr. R. Lang, played three years, -and got fifteen wickets at a cost of only 84 runs, or a fraction over -5 runs per wicket--an analysis that has never been surpassed, and -deserves to be quoted as an example for young players to emulate. In -1860 he bowled in the two innings twenty-one overs for 19 runs and -six wickets. In 1861 he lost his pace owing to an injured arm and was -unsuccessful, bowling twenty-six overs for 30 runs and no wicket. In -1862, in the two innings, he bowled twenty-nine overs for 35 runs and -nine wickets; and, to take the first innings alone, we find he bowled -only thirty-four balls for 4 runs and five wickets all clean bowled. -Considering his pace he was very straight, and only bowled 6 wides -in all three matches. H. W. Salter of Cambridge played two years, -and obtained fourteen wickets for 74 runs, or a fraction over 5 runs -a wicket, another extraordinary performance. Mr. H. M Plowden, who -played four years from 1860, lowered nineteen wickets for 153 runs, -or an average of 8 runs a wicket. In no previous or subsequent years -has either University been so amply provided with bowling strength as -was Cambridge during these three years, as, besides Salter, Lang, and -Plowden, in 1860 she had Messrs. E. B. Fawcett and D. R. Onslow, and in -1861 and ’62 the Hon. C. G. Lyttelton, who bowled for the Gentlemen. - -The greatest bowling feat in the whole history of University cricket -belongs to Mr. S. E. Butler, of Eton and Oxford renown, and took place -in 1871. Cambridge had some good bats in her eleven--Messrs. Money, -Tobin, Fryer, Scott, Yardley and Thornton, a rough and ready hitter in -the person of Mr. Cobden, and a fair batsman in Mr. Stedman. But Mr. -Butler found an old-fashioned Lord’s wicket, and he bowled a terrific -pace and got on a spot which shot and made his balls break considerably -down the hill. He got the whole ten wickets in one innings, and in -the match he lowered fifteen wickets for 95 runs. His bowling was -unplayable on the first day; eight of the ten wickets in the first -innings were clean bowled, and twelve out of the whole fifteen. - -Mr. Woods, who played for Cambridge for the four years ending 1891, -bowled 184 overs for 318 runs and thirty-six wickets, an average of -five wickets per innings at 8 runs per wicket, a great record for these -days--a feat great enough to entitle him to an honorary degree in the -opinion of the Master of Peterhouse. - -Mr. Berkeley had during his four years an uphill task, as he was -in three losing elevens, and that means a heavy handicap, as every -cricketer knows. But considering that he was the only real bowler on -his side during all the four years he played, his record of 196 overs -for 341 runs and twenty-seven wickets, and 12 runs per wicket, is very -good, and such a bowler deserved a better fate than to play in three -defeats out of four matches. - -It will interest and comfort young cricketers to remind them how many -great batsmen have failed in these matches. We feel sure that these -latter will excuse us for pointing out their shortcomings; for they -will know that we do so only to sustain their weaker brethren and -illustrate the glorious uncertainty of the game. The late Mr. John -Walker, who for several years represented the Gentlemen, got 19 runs in -six innings, or a proud average of 3. His younger brother, Mr. R. D. -Walker, the silver-haired veteran of five Inter-University contests, -gallantly led off with an innings of 42; but the result of his five -years’ batting against Cambridge was 84 runs in ten innings, his first -innings in fact amounting to one-half of the total runs he scored in -five years. Yet he played for the Gentlemen in 1863, 1864, and 1865, -and these were the last three years he played for Oxford. M. A. W. -Ridley played for four years, and his runs for seven innings came to a -total of 61, or an average of 10 runs per innings, as once he carried -his bat. The present Lord Cobham, who played for the Gentlemen of -England his first year at Cambridge, batted exactly on a par with Mr. -Ridley, as he also made 61 runs in six innings, and was once not out. -Cambridge men of his date will tell you that on Fenner’s nobody was -ever more dangerous, and his scores for those days were enormous. Mr. -C. G. Lane--of whom the poet wrote: - - You may join with me in wishing that the Oval once again - May resound with hearty plaudits to the praise of Mr. Lane-- - -played seven innings for a total of 35 runs. Take courage, then, young -cricketer, and know that if you fail, you fail in good company. - -Most extraordinary have been the vicissitudes of fortune in several of -these matches. Oxford in 1871 had a fine eleven, which easily defeated -Cambridge by eight wickets; and in 1872 they played no fewer than -eight of their old eleven. Cambridge played seven, and the four new -men were the famous pair of young Etonians, Messrs. Longman and Tabor, -the Harrovian, Mr. Baily, and the Wykehamist, Mr. Raynor. The odds on -Oxford at the start were about 2 to 1. Yet Cambridge on winning the -toss put together the largest total yet realised by either side in any -one innings, namely 388 runs. The two Etonian freshmen were on the -whole entitled to the chief honours on this occasion, as for the first -time they made over 100 runs before the fall of a wicket. Mr. Longman -was badly run out by Mr. Yardley after batting for about two and a -half hours, or else another 100 runs might have been put on. When the -Oxford eleven went in to bat, not one of them could look at Mr. Powys, -the fastest bowler of the day, except Messrs. Ottaway and Tylecote, who -both played remarkably well in the second innings. Mr. Powys secured -thirteen wickets at a cost of 75 runs, or a trifle under 6 runs a -wicket. - -Everybody has heard of the 2-run success of Cambridge in 1870, and -the 6-run victory of Oxford in 1875. The difference between the two -matches consisted in the fact that in 1870 not till the last wicket -was actually bowled down did it appear possible for Oxford to lose; -in 1875 the issue was quite doubtful till Mr. A. F. Smith made that -fatal stroke to a plain lob. Cambridge in 1870 were on the whole -the favourites; not that there was much to choose between the two -elevens, but because they had won the three previous years. In batting, -Cambridge had Messrs. Dale, Money, and Yardley; and Oxford, Messrs. -Ottaway, Pauncefote, and Tylecote--quite a case of six of one and half -a dozen of the other, though Yardley was far the most dangerous man. -In bowling Oxford were handicapped by Mr. Butler’s strained arm, which -prevented him from bowling more than a few overs; but they possessed -Messrs. Belcher and Francis, two good fast bowlers. Cambridge had -Cobden for a fast bowler, Harrison Ward for a medium pace, and Bourne -for slow round. So while Mr. Francis was some way the best fast bowler -of the two elevens, Oxford were deficient in variety, while Cambridge -possessed all paces and also Mr. Money’s lobs. Cambridge won the toss -and put together 147 runs, the good bats all failing, and only Mr. -Scott doing credit to himself by an innings of 45. Oxford scored more -equally, though neither Ottaway nor Pauncefote contributed more than -modest double figures; the total, nevertheless, came to 175, or a -majority of 28. The next hour’s play apparently saw Cambridge utterly -routed. Mr. Dale stopped all that time, but nobody stopped with him. -The total at the fall of the fifth wicket was 40, or only 12 on. ‘We -are going to win a match at last!’ said one of the Oxonians to another -who had been educated at Rugby. ‘Wait a bit,’ said the Rugbeian, who -turned his head and saw Yardley advancing to the wicket; ‘I have -seen this man get 100 before now.’ The companion of the last speaker -possibly had not seen Yardley perform this feat, but he had not long -to wait. There are several batsmen whose play baffles criticism, and -Yardley was one of them. He certainly played some balls in a manner -that purists found fault with, but good judges of the game could see -that there was genius in his method; and genius, as we all know, rises -above canons and criticism. If Mr. Yardley had not touched a bat for -six months, still he might walk to the wickets and play a magnificent -innings; for genius requires little or no practice. Those familiar with -his play knew that they might look out for squalls if he was allowed -to get set. Mr. Dale was at the other end, playing every ball with a -perfectly straight bat and in the most correct style. In the minds of -both of them it was a crisis; for each knew that unless they put on a -lot of runs the match was lost, as five of their side were out. One -mistake and Cambridge would have to retire beaten. But no mistake was -made. Yardley got set; the bowling was fast and so was the ground, and -the former was hit into a complete knot. There seemed to be no prospect -of getting either of them out, when Mr. Yardley sent a ball hard back -to the bowler, who made a fine catch off a fine hit, and the Cambridge -man retired with the first Inter-University 100. Mr. Dale made a leg -hit, and was splendidly caught by Mr. Ottaway with one hand over the -ropes. - -In a short time the innings was over, and Oxford had to face a total -of 179 to win the match. In these days on a hard wicket this is -regarded as a comparatively easy feat; but runs were not so easy to -accumulate eighteen years ago, and the betting was now even, Cambridge -for choice. One Oxford wicket was soon got, and then a long stand was -made by Messrs. Fortescue and Ottaway, both of whom played excellent -cricket. The total was brought up to 72 for only one wicket, the -betting veered round to 2 to 1 on Oxford, and Mr. Ward was put on to -bowl. This change was the turning point of the game. Mr. Fortescue -was soon bowled, so was Mr. Pauncefote, and with the total at 86 the -betting was again evens, Oxford for choice. Mr. Ward had found his -spot and was bowling with deadly precision when Mr. Tylecote came in. -Both Ottaway and Tylecote now batted cautiously and well, and Mr. Ward -went off for a time. Mr. Tylecote was a very good bat, but compared -to Ottaway only mortal; how on earth Ottaway was to be got out was a -problem that seemed well-nigh insoluble. The total went up to 153, or -only 26 runs to win and seven wickets to go down; the betting 6 to 1 on -Oxford. A yell was heard, and Mr. Tylecote was bowled by Mr. Ward, and -Mr. Townshend came in. - -Mr. Ward, from the pavilion end, was at this stage bowling to Ottaway, -who made a characteristic hit, low and not hard, to short-leg. Mr. -Fryer was not a good field, and Cambridge generally were fielding -badly, but he rose to the occasion and made a good catch close to the -ground, so close that Ottaway appealed, but in vain, and the score -stood at 160 for 5 wickets down--19 runs wanted to win. Mr. Hill now -came in, and began to play a free, confident game at once. A bye was -run and a sharp run was made by Townshend by a hit to third man, -but Townshend was then caught off Ward, and Francis came in, and -after making a single was l.b.w. to the same bowler. During Hill’s -partnership with Townshend and Francis he knocked up 11 runs by good -bustling play, and he now stood at the nursery end to receive the last -ball of an over from Ward, 5 runs being wanted to win, and Butler -in the other end. Hill hit the ball fairly hard to sharp short-leg, -and Bourne measured his length on the ground, stopped the ball, and -converted the hit from a fourer to a single. Hill got to the other end, -an over was called and the ball tossed to Cobden, who was faced by -Hill, 4 runs being wanted to win and 3 to tie. - -We say with confidence that never can one over bowled by any bowler -at any future time surpass the over that Cobden was about to deliver -then, and it deserves a minute description. Cobden took a long run and -bowled very fast, and was for his pace a straight bowler. But he bowled -with little or no break, had not got a puzzling delivery, and though -effective against inferior bats, would never have succeeded in bowling -out a man like Mr. Ottaway if he had sent a thousand balls to him. -However, on the present occasion Ottaway was out, those he had to bowl -to were not first-rate batsmen, and Cobden could bowl a good yorker. - -You might almost have heard a pin drop as Cobden began his run and -the ball whizzed from his hand. Mr. Hill played the ball slowly to -cover-point, and rather a sharp run was made. As the match stood, -Oxford wanted 2 to tie and 3 to win, and three wickets to go down: Mr. -Butler to receive the ball. The second ball that Cobden bowled was -very similar to the first, straight and well up on the off stump. Mr. -Butler did what anybody else except Louis Hall or Shrewsbury would -have done, namely, let drive vigorously. Unfortunately he did not keep -the ball down, and it went straight and hard a catch to Mr. Bourne, -to whom everlasting credit is due, for he held it, and away went Mr. -Butler--amidst Cambridge shouts this time. The position was getting -serious, for neither Mr. Stewart nor Mr. Belcher was renowned as a -batsman. Rather pale, but with a jaunty air that cricketers are well -aware frequently conceals a sickly feeling of nervousness, Mr. Belcher -walked to the wicket and took his guard. He felt that if only he could -stop one ball and be bowled out the next, still Mr. Hill would get -another chance of a knock and the match would probably be won. Cobden -had bowled two balls, and two more wickets had to be got; if therefore -a wicket was got each ball the match would be won by Cambridge, and Mr. -Hill would have no further opportunity of distinguishing himself. In a -dead silence Cobden again took the ball and bowled a fast ball well up -on the batsman’s legs. A vision of the winning hit flashed across Mr. -Belcher’s brain, and he raised his bat preparatory to performing great -things, hit at the ball and missed it, and he was bowled off his legs. -There was still one more ball wanted to complete the over, and Mr. -Belcher, a sad man, walked away amid an uproarious storm of cheers. - -Matters were becoming distinctly grave, and very irritating must -it have been to Mr. Hill, who was like a billiard-player watching -his rival in the middle of a big break; he could say a good deal and -think a lot, but he could do nothing. Mr. Stewart, _spes ultima_ of -Oxford, with feelings that are utterly impossible to describe, padded -and gloved, nervously took off his coat in the pavilion. If ever a man -deserved pity, Mr. Stewart deserved it on that occasion. He did not -profess to be a good bat, and his friends did not claim so much for -him; he was an excellent wicket-keeper, but he had to go in at a crisis -that the best bat in England would not like to face. Mr. Pauncefote, -the Oxford captain, was seen addressing a few words of earnest -exhortation to him, and with a rather sick feeling Mr. Stewart went -to the wicket. Mr. Hill looked at him cheerfully, but very earnestly -did Mr. Stewart wish the next ball well over. He took his guard and -held his hands low on the bat handle, which was fixed fast as a tree -on the block-hole; for Mr. Pauncefote had earnestly entreated Mr. -Stewart to put the bat straight in the block-hole and keep it there -without moving it. This was not by any means bad advice, for the bat -covers a great deal of the wicket, and though it is a piece of counsel -not likely to be offered to W. G. Grace or Stoddart, it might not -have been inexpedient to offer it to Mr. Stewart. Here, then, was the -situation--Mr. Stewart standing manfully up to the wicket, Mr. Cobden -beginning his run, and a perfectly dead silence in the crowd. Whiz went -the ball; but alas!--as many other people, cricketers and politicians -alike, have done--the good advice is neglected, and Stewart, instead of -following his captain’s exhortation to keep his bat still and upright -in the block-hole, just lifted it: fly went the bails, and Cambridge -had won the match by two runs! The situation was bewildering. Nobody -could quite realise what had happened for a second or so, but then---- -Up went Mr. Absalom’s hat, down the pavilion steps with miraculous -rapidity flew the Rev. A. R. Ward, and smash went Mr. Charles Marsham’s -umbrella against the pavilion brickwork.[35] - -One word more about this never-to-be-forgotten match. The unique -performance of Cobden has unduly cast in the shade Mr. Ward’s -performance in the second innings. It was a good wicket, and Oxford -had certainly on the whole a good batting eleven. Yet Mr. Ward bowled -thirty-two overs for 29 runs and got six wickets, and of those six -wickets five were certainly the best batsmen on the side. He clean -bowled Messrs. Fortescue, Pauncefote, and Tylecote, and got out in -other ways Messrs. Ottaway, Townshend, and Francis. It is hardly too -much to say that in this innings Mr. Ward got the six best wickets and -Mr. Cobden the four worst. In the whole match Mr. Ward got nine wickets -for 62 runs, and this again, let it be said, on an excellent ground. -Comparisons are odious, however, and the four Cambridge men, Yardley, -Dale, Ward, and Cobden, have no reason to be jealous of each other, and -every reason to be satisfied with themselves. - -Oxford have got a victory to set off against this Cambridge triumph -in 1870. It took place five years later, and though Mr. Ridley’s -bowling at the finish was not condensed into one sensational over like -Cobden’s, still the greatest credit is due to him for putting himself -on at the right moment, fully realising an undoubted truth, that lobs -are most terrifying to very nervous players at a crisis. - -Comparing the two elevens, on paper it would appear that Oxford were -the better bowling eleven, and were considerably superior in fielding. -In 1870 Cambridge deserved to have lost the match on account of their -bad fielding; in 1875 they succeeded in doing so. Messrs. Webbe and -Lang started by making 86 for the first wicket, and Mr. Webbe was twice -badly missed at short-slip. Mr. Lang ought to have been easily stumped. -In Oxford’s second innings four Oxford wickets, including Ridley and -Webbe, were down for 34. Mr. Briggs came in and was badly missed at -short-slip directly, and disaster was averted for some time; and Mr. -Game, who scored 22, was missed shortly after he went to the wicket. -The Oxford fielding was very fine all through, though one member missed -two easy catches. The bowling was more evenly divided; Oxford had more -bowlers than Cambridge, though Messrs. Sharpe and Patterson were as -good as, or better than, Messrs. Lang and Buckland. But besides these -two Oxford had Mr. Royle and Mr. Ridley and Mr. Kelcey, while the two -Cambridge bowlers had to do most of the work. - -In batting the position was somewhat similar. Ridley and Webbe were -superior to Longman and the second best Cantab, but on the other hand -Cambridge were stronger all through. On the whole the sides were very -even. - -Oxford made a good start, thanks to the politeness of the Cambridge -field, though both Webbe and Lang played well, and fair scores were -made by Ridley, Pulman and Buckland, but at no time during the match -did Mr. Ridley appear at home to Mr. Patterson’s bowling. The total -reached 200, and there were 20 extras, of which 15 were byes; and the -Cambridge wicket-keeping was not up to the mark. Cambridge batted on -the whole disappointingly in the first innings; the captain, Mr. G. H. -Longman, played a very good innings of 40, but the other scores were -below what was expected, and again did extras prove of great value, for -Cambridge realised 17 thereby. But, on the whole, the Oxford fielding -was very fine, and both Messrs. Longman and Blacker, who played good -steady cricket, found great difficulty in getting the ball away. - -At the close of the Cambridge innings Oxford had a valuable balance of -37 in their favour, and most thoroughly did they deserve this advantage -on account of their very superior fielding. It is always consoling to -an eleven who are beginning their second innings to feel that every -hit adds to the total that the other side must get before they can -win, and that their energy is not to be applied towards wiping off a -deficit. Oxford had this balance of 37 in their favour, and very sorely -was it needed, for their wickets fell with depressing rapidity. Both -Sharpe and Patterson bowled admirably; the former had both Lang and -Campbell with the score at 5 only. Ridley again fell to Patterson, with -the total at 16, and at 34 Webbe was out to a good running catch from -short-slip to short-leg. - -The match now looked well for Cambridge, as Ridley and Webbe were far -superior to their comrades. Mr. Webbe had scored most consistently all -through the year; this second innings of 21 contained no mistake, and -nobody ever could have looked more firmly set for a large score. Four -wickets for 34 was a very bad start, but again did the Cambridge eleven -show great politeness to their opponents; for directly Mr. Briggs came -in he was badly missed at short-slip off Mr. Sharpe, and Messrs. Briggs -and Pulman raised the score to 64, when the former was clean bowled -by a lob. Mr. Pulman stayed till the total reached 74, when he was -stumped off Mr. Sharpe for an admirable innings of 30. He had played -very well in his first innings, but his second stopped an undeniable -rot, was quite chanceless, and no innings under the circumstances could -have been more useful. Mr. Game then came in, and again did Cambridge -rise to the occasion and miss him off an easy chance when he had made -3 only; and he showed his gratitude by hitting up 22 before he was -well caught, the total being 109. Mr. Buckland was clean bowled by -Mr. Patterson first ball, and nine runs later Mr. Royle was stumped, -having played a most useful innings of 21. Both Messrs. Tylecote and -Kelcey smacked up small double figures, and the total of the innings -was 137--a very much better score than at one time seemed probable. If -the chances had been taken the total might not have reached 100, and if -a list could be made of the matches lost by bad catching, angels would -weep. - -Oxford’s second innings was not over till a quarter to seven, but Mr. -Ridley rightly insisted on the letter of the law being kept, and five -minutes before the drawing of the stumps Oxford were in the field and -two nervous Cambridge batsmen in a fading light were walking slowly to -the wickets. Only one over was bowled, and a leg-hit for four was the -only result. - -[Illustration: THE INTERVAL] - -We have said that the Oxford captain rightly insisted on Cambridge -going in, and we contend that Mr. Ridley acted wisely and not unfairly -in so doing. He had the law on his side, and if the law is not to be -enforced in the University match, when is it ever likely to be? Mr. -Ridley also probably anticipated the fact that the Cambridge captain -would be unwilling to run the chance of sacrificing one of his good -wickets, and that the order of going in would be altered. This may be a -considerable disadvantage to the side; it is not certain that it was in -the present case; but Mr. Macan, who went in fifth wicket down in the -first innings, had to go in considerably later in the second innings, -and thus a good batsman was wasted. - -Messrs. Sharpe and Hamilton went in first; at the beginning of the -third day Cambridge wanted 171 runs to win, and had all their wickets -standing. Both Sharpe and Hamilton played well at the start, and -brought the score up to 21, when the latter put his leg in front and -departed. Mr. Lucas came in, but was clean bowled for 5 runs: two -wickets for 26. Mr. Longman, the captain, came in, and played steadily -and well, and the bowling for the first time in the innings seemed to -be collared; Lang went off, Ridley bowled three overs for 11 runs, -and Mr. Royle took the ball. Mr. Royle’s bowling proved the turning -point of the game. He was not by any means an accurate bowler, but at -times his balls broke fast and were most difficult to play. He bowled -three maidens, and with the fifteenth ball clean bowled Mr. Sharpe, -who had played an excellent innings of 29. He had stepped into the -breach overnight and gone in when twilight was coming on; having passed -through that ordeal safely, he completed a most useful innings next -day. Messrs. Longman and Sharpe had brought the score from 26 to 65, -but Royle made Blacker play a ball on at 67, and clean bowled Longman -at 76 for a second very good innings. The ball that bowled Mr. Longman -was a dead shooter of the old sort, which came back also considerably. -Messrs. Greenfield and Lyttelton were now in together, and the score -again steadily rose, though Mr. Lyttelton was manifestly uneasy with -Royle’s bowling. However, the total came to 97 when Lyttelton was -badly missed, and a snick put 100 on the board; but at 101 Greenfield -made a bad hit and was caught at mid-off, and in walked Mr. Sims. Sims -this year was a powerful and dangerous bat--in fact, he was the most -determined hitter in the two elevens, and on the present occasion -he made a great bid for victory. He possessed a bulldog courage in -whatever he undertook, and his contemporaries at Cambridge could -scarcely believe that so strong a man could have caught a chill and -died so quickly as he did some few years later while in full work as -an energetic clergyman in the North of England. Shortly after Sims had -gone in, Lyttelton was a second time missed, though fortunately for -Oxford the mistake mattered little, for from a fine leg-hit he was -grandly caught by Webbe close to the ropes while running at full speed. -It was not a high hit, but it would have hit a spectator on the nose -if the fieldsman had not caught it. There was no finer bit of fielding -in the match than this, and it was hard to be got out in such a way, -though the batsman was lucky to have made 20 runs. The score was 114 -when Lyttelton was out, or 60 to win and 3 wickets to go down, and the -betting 7 to 4 on Oxford. Messrs. Sims and Patterson played well, and -brought the score to 128, or 46 to win, when down came the rain and -play was stopped for an hour and a half. It rained hard for a time, and -Oxford had to turn out to bowl with a wet ball and field on slippery -ground. Mr. Patterson played well, and Sims shut his teeth and went -to work with savage determination. The runs came fast; in 20 minutes -the score had been raised from 128 to 161, when Ridley went on to bowl -and with his first ball clean bowled Patterson. Macan then came in and -made a single (13 to win), and a mighty whack did one of Ridley’s balls -then get from Sims, who sent the ball over the bowler’s head to the -ropes like a cannon shot, and Lang took the ball from Royle, 9 runs -being wanted to win the match for Cambridge. A leg-bye was got from -Lang’s first ball and a no ball followed, making 7 to win. It appeared -good odds on Cambridge, for Sims did not look like getting out, and -his hits had a way of going to the boundary. Be it remembered that the -ball was wet and heavy, and forgetfulness of this fact on the part of -Sims at this stage cost him his wicket and Cambridge the match. Mr. -Game was fielding deep square-leg close to the ropes by the tennis -court, and Pulman was on the on side close to the left-hand corner of -the enclosure that stands on the left facing the pavilion. There was -a considerable space between these two fields, and off the full pitch -on his legs which Sims now received from Lang the ball might have been -swept safely under the ropes anywhere between the two men. But Sims -no doubt felt as strong and as lusty as an eagle, and forgetting that -the ball was wet and heavy, got under it and tried to lift it over the -ropes. The sodden ball refused to go so far, and Pulman, running some -distance, made what with the ball dry and of a normal weight would have -been an ordinary country catch. With the ball wet and heavy, however, -his success was the more commendable, and back to the pavilion, -crestfallen and sad, went Sims. Returning for a moment to the 2-run -match, the two men for whom sympathy may be felt because the game did -not result in favour of their side were Ottaway in 1870 and Sims in -1875. Ottaway got out when his side wanted 18 runs to win and had four -wickets to go down, and Sims when only 7 runs were wanted and there -were two wickets to fall. Both are now dead, but as long as any matches -in England are remembered these two innings will be borne in the memory -of those who witnessed them. - -Mr. Smith had to face a crisis he had long been dreading, and he -walked apprehensively to the wicket. Mr. Macan, who was in, had only -received two or three balls, so both had to feel their way cautiously. -It is, perhaps, true to say that at the extreme moments of nervousness -climatic surroundings have no effect on the constitution; be this as -it may, the air was chilly, the ground was wet, and the sun invisible. -Probably Mr. Smith felt as cold as if he had been in a damp cellar. A -well-known Harrovian told the writer at this stage that he had seen Mr. -Smith get over 25 runs against the famous George Freeman’s bowling. -What did that matter if he was unable to get six runs against Ridley’s -lobs? He somehow or other stopped two balls in a doubtful sort of -style, and played slowly forward to the third, thinking that after the -manner of lobs it would twist. The wet ground prevented this; it went -on and hit the middle stump, and Oxford won the match by six runs. - -We regard this match as a model of what a cricket match should be; -the runs were not too numerous, the interest was kept up to the very -end. It would have been hard lines perhaps for Oxford to have lost the -match, for the rain that fell in Cambridge’s last innings was unlucky -for the dark blue; it is impossible to bowl or field well with a wet -ball, and it happened that Sims was just the man to take advantage of -this state of things. The bowling was managed with great skill by Mr. -Ridley, and, as we have said before, he realised an undoubted truth, -that lobs are often fatal to a batsman who is paralysed by nervousness. - -It is not easy to say with any certainty that the bowling at the -Universities is better or worse than it was. We are inclined to think -that, writing in 1898, there are signs that it is better than it was -between the years 1872 and 1888, but not equal to the days of C. -D. Marsham, R. Lang, Plowden, and Kenney, but in those days it was -quite possible for a side to have weak bowling, and yet get out their -opponents with the help of the more difficult wickets. This was the -case in 1864. Oxford were led by the famous Mr. Mitchell, and were a -strong batting eleven. Cambridge were fairly strong in batting, but -they deliberately chose to meet Oxford with only two bowlers, Messrs. -Curteis and Pelham. So well did these two gentlemen perform that almost -to the very end the result was doubtful. Messrs. Fowler and Booth each -succeeded in getting a wicket in the first innings, and Mr. Booth one -in the second innings, but between them they only bowled twenty-two -overs in the whole match, while Mr. Curteis bowled seventy-five overs -for eight wickets, and Mr. Pelham fifty-six overs for five wickets. -This was a fine match, won at the finish by a grand innings of Mr. -Mitchell’s. No man ever went in at a more critical time than he did -this second innings, neither did anybody ever bat with better nerve. -Out of 125 required to win the match, no fewer than 55 (not out) fell -to his share, and Oxford won by four wickets. The Cambridge eleven -of 1878 had a most extraordinary run of success, never, as far as we -know, equalled by any University eleven. They won no fewer than eight -matches, and not a defeat or a draw is found against them. They beat -Oxford by 238 runs, and the Australians in one innings. There is no -doubt that during that year, if a representative English eleven had -been chosen to play Australia or any other eleven, no fewer than four -out of the Cambridge eleven would have been found in the English team. -They were not all good, but the superlative excellence of those four -made the eleven one of the best that has yet played in these matches; -and that of 1879 was almost as good. - -It may interest some of our readers if we make a few remarks as to the -standing of the various public schools in regard to the composition of -the University elevens. We have analysed the elevens from 1861 to 1897 -inclusive, and, as is perhaps natural, Eton comes first, having had -during that period fifty-nine of her alumni representing one or other -of the Universities. We are not reckoning the number of years that each -played, but fifty-nine different Etonians have in the last thirty-three -years played in the University match: thirty-four for Cambridge, -twenty-five for Oxford. Harrow is represented by forty-six players: -twenty-four at Oxford, and twenty-two at Cambridge. Rugby comes next -with twenty-nine: nineteen for Oxford and ten for Cambridge. At one -time Rugby was almost on a level with Eton and Harrow, for from the -years 1861 to 1873 inclusive there were always two Rugby men playing in -the match, and sometimes more; since that time, however, more than two -Rugbeians have never played, two have played only twice, and from 1884 -downwards two only have played. Mr. Leslie and Mr. Warner were the last -good cricketers Rugby sent out, and her prowess seems much diminished -as compared with the days of Pauncefote, Yardley, Francis, Kenney, and -Case. Winchester has been represented by twenty-three, of whom all but -three have played for Oxford, while out of eighteen Marlborough men -twelve have played for Oxford; but Cambridge men will ever gratefully -tender their thanks to Marlborough for the services of Mr. A. G. Steel, -by far the greatest player ever turned out by that school, and perhaps -the best all-round cricketer that has yet played for either University. -Seventeen Cliftonians have played for Oxford, and two for Cambridge; -but eleven out of fourteen Uppingham boys have represented Cambridge. -Repton has contributed nine players, five representing Cambridge and -four Oxford. Charterhouse has had nine University players, Tonbridge -six, Cheltenham and Westminster have had five, and on the whole the -proportion between Oxford and Cambridge has been about equal. - -Of all-round players both Universities have had their full share in -numbers. Cambridge has been helped by Makinson, A. G. Steel, C. T. -Studd, and F. S. Jackson, and Oxford by Messrs. Maitland, R. D. Walker, -and S. C. Voules. The great strength of Oxford in the years 1863–4–5 -arose not only from the fact that in Mr. Mitchell it possessed one -of the five greatest bats in England, but also that it had four such -wonderful all-round men as Messrs. Voules, Walker, Evans, and Inge in -1863; and the same quartette, with the substitution of Mr. Maitland for -Mr. Inge, in 1864 and 1865. But not one of the five was quite equal -to any one of the Cambridge quartette, and when we say this we take -as our basis the performances of the four in the University matches; -and we do not consider the men who played before 1854, for it is -difficult to make fair comparisons over so long a distance of time. The -above-mentioned four will be found in the first half-dozen of batsmen -and in the first half-dozen of bowlers. Messrs. Makinson, Yardley, -Lucas, A. Lyttelton, A. G. Steel, C. T. Studd, F. S. Jackson, and N. -F. Druce are the best batsmen from Cambridge, and Messrs. Mitchell, -Maitland, Ottaway, Pauncefote, E. F. S. Tylecote, Key, Rashleigh, and -Palairet the best from Oxford. In bowling, the champions from Oxford -are Messrs. Marsham, Traill, Kenney, S. E. Butler, and Berkeley; from -Cambridge, Messrs. Plowden, Pelham, Lang, Woods, and A. G. Steel. This -is an opinion only, and would have to be considerably altered if we -were to take another basis than the Inter-University match to draw our -conclusions from. Mr. Kenney never played for the Gentlemen against the -Players, and neither he nor Mr. Plowden could be compared as a bowler -to Mr. Kempson, whose performance against the Players is historical. -But he failed against Oxford. In the same way Lord Cobham, Mr. Ridley, -and Mr. Lane were each as good as Mr. Pauncefote, but they failed in -the Inter-University match, and consequently are out of our list. - -The two following tables will show the best batting and bowling -averages of those who have played for four years, and in the case of -Mr. C. D. Marsham for five years, in the University match. The minimum -batting average being 30, and the minimum bowling average being 12:-- - - +------------------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ - | Name |Innings| Runs |Not out| Average| - +------------------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ - |K. J. Key | 7 | 294 | 1 | 49 | - |C. W. Wright | 7 | 291 | 1 | 48·3 | - |R. A. H. Mitchell | 7 | 254 | 1 | 42·2 | - |W. Yardley | 7 | 278 | 0 | 39·5 | - |A. P. Lucas | 8 | 254 | 1 | 36·2 | - |Hon. A. Lyttelton | 8 | 234 | 1 | 33·3 | - |G. B. Studd | 7 | 225 | 0 | 32·1 | - |A. G. Steel | 7 | 184 | 1 | 30·4 | - +------------------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ - - +---------------------+-------+-------+-------------+ - | | | | Average per | - | Name |Wickets| Runs | wicket | - +---------------------+-------+-------+-------------+ - |S. M. J. Woods | 36 | 318 | 8·30 | - |C. D. Marsham | 40 | 362 | 9·1 | - |H. M. Plowden | 19 | 188 | 9·17 | - |A. G. Steel | 38 | 342 | 9·31 | - |W. F. Maitland | 21 | 213 | 10·3 | - |Hon. F. G. Pelham | 26 | 292 | 11·8 | - |S. E. Butler | 25 | 312 | 12·12 | - |G. F. H. Berkeley | 27 | 341 | 12·17 | - +---------------------+-------+-------+-------------+ - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[35] The difficulty of getting accurate facts about this unique over -has been immense. The author has before him the written statement -of Mr. Hill, a copy of the _Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News_ -containing a letter of Mr. Yardley, who was keeping wicket and was -therefore in a position to judge, and a letter from Mr. Cobden and Mr. -Belcher. In the first edition of this book Mr. Stewart is said to have -been bowled off his legs; this is inaccurate, and the author apologizes -for the blunder. Mr. Cobden complains of the account generally, and -says that all three balls were of a good length, and that he never -bowled better balls in all his life. The author in the above has -written what he believes to be accurate, relying chiefly on the written -evidence of Messrs. Hill, Yardley, and Belcher, and in a less degree -from what he has heard from some spectators. It was not Stewart that -was bowled off his legs, but Belcher; and in order that the public -may form their own judgment, the written statements of Messrs. Hill, -Yardley, and Belcher are here inserted. Mr. Hill writes:--‘Belcher was -bowled with a yorker (half-volley?) and Stewart with a half-volley, but -whether off his leg or not I do not remember.’ Mr. Hill also writes -that on meeting Cobden some years later, Cobden repeated that they were -three of the best balls he ever bowled, to which Mr. Hill replied that -they were all half-volleys, and that he believed that if he had had any -one of them he could have won the match with a fourer. Now Mr. Yardley, -in allusion to the author’s statement that the ball that Butler was -caught off was straight and well up on the off stump, writes: ‘As a -matter of fact the ball in question was a very long hop, extremely wide -on the off, so much so that I have no hesitation in stating that if Mr. -Butler had made no attempt to strike at it the umpire would have called -a wide. The batsman, however, was possessed of an exceptionally long -reach, and just managed to strike the ball with the extreme end of his -bat to cover-point, where it was beautifully caught by Mr. Bourne.’ - -Now as to Belcher’s ball, Mr. Yardley says: ‘The ball in question was -the most delicious half-volley on the legs, which Mr. Belcher did his -utmost to hit out of Lord’s ground. Fortunately for Cambridge his deeds -were not so good as his intentions, for he hit too hard at the ball, -which he missed, and which, striking him on the left leg, cannoned on -to his right leg, and from thence on to his wicket.’ - -On the point of Mr. Stewart’s ball Mr. Yardley writes: ‘This fourth and -last ball was the only straight one of that celebrated over. It was -an exceedingly long hop, scarcely pitching half-way, and coming along -surprisingly slow off the pitch. Had it not been for that circumstance -Mr. Stewart would probably have not lost his wicket as he did, for -it was only at the very last moment that he neglected his captain’s -instructions and removed his bat from the block-hole, thereby allowing -the ball to strike his off stump about three-quarters of the way up.’ -Mr Yardley also writes that the scene appears to him as vivid after a -lapse of twenty years as it did then. - -Mr. Belcher writes: ‘I am _quite certain_ that I was bowled off my -legs; the ball to the best of my recollection hit me just below the -knee of the right leg and went into the wicket. At any rate I am quite -clear as to my leg being hit, and my impression is that it was a very -good-length ball, and not a half-volley. I don’t think I hit at it all. -Of course at such a distance of time my recollections are somewhat -vague, _but the one point I am quite sure of is that I was bowled off -my leg_.’ - -With these extracts before them, the matter is now left to posterity. - - - - -CHAPTER XII. - -GENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS. - -(BY THE HON. R. H. LYTTELTON.) - - -At first sight it appears impossible that amateurs--men who play when -they chance to find it convenient--should be able to hold their own -against professional cricketers who make the game the business of their -lives. Cricket, however, is the one game where the two classes contend -more or less on an equality, unless football be also an exception. Many -amateur cricketers are not bound to work for their daily bread, and -they can consequently find time to play as much as a ‘professional,’ if -the accepted slang in which the adjective is employed as a substantive -be permissible. Such was the state of things a few years ago when the -Walkers, the Graces, Mr. Buchanan, and others could always be depended -on to take part in the annual matches against the Players. - -But there are other reasons besides; and here we tread on rather -delicate ground. Suffice it to say that at one time, and that was when -the Gentlemen used heavily to defeat the Players, there was such a very -thin border-line between the status of the amateur and professional, -that a definition of ‘amateur’ was often asked for and never obtained. -The position was getting acute when finally the Marylebone Club, which -is not in the habit of moving except when very strong pressure is -exerted, was obliged to discuss and legislate on the matter. Broadly -speaking, the rule stands that amateurs may take expenses, and a -difficult and delicate point is now set at rest. - -It is a striking illustration of the great popularity of the game -that a large and increasing number of men annually give themselves up -to the profession of cricket, and it is only in cricket that amateurs -and professionals regularly compete against each other. We have heard -that from the county of Nottingham alone several hundred professional -bowlers emerge every year, and go to fulfil cricket engagements in -various parts of the kingdom. The limits of cricket seem likely to -be extended, and we know of several English professionals who have -accepted offers from America and elsewhere. So long ago as 1864 the -famous Wm. Caffyn was engaged in Australia; later on, Jesse Hide, of -Sussex, was in South Australia, and several other players have been in -America. All professionals, or nearly all, first come into notice as -bowlers. A club with a ground wants a man who can bowl to its members -for an evening’s practice, and he has to be there to attend on any -member who may happen to come. As a rule also, he is required to play -for the club in the Saturday matches, and he may earn by way of fixed -salary, together with what he makes by bowling at a shilling for half -an hour, 3_l._ or 4_l._ per week. - -If the club is situated in a county which possesses a county club, -the professional may have inducements held out to him to take up a -permanent residence and become a naturalised resident. The county of -Nottingham, for instance, has only one county eleven, but she has -hundreds of professionals. These men get engagements in all directions, -and if they are good enough to be asked to play for their adopted -county, it would be hard to deprive them of a livelihood; though no -doubt it is provoking to Nottingham to see the success of Lancashire -largely owing to the play of Briggs, a Notts man of whose virtues -Lancashire became aware before his own county. Nor is Briggs a solitary -specimen, for Walter Wright, Lockwood, Bean, Brown, and Wheeler play -respectively for Kent, Surrey, Sussex, Cheshire, and Leicestershire. - -The congestion of professional ability in certain favoured districts -is hard to explain. Every cricketer has heard of Lascelles Hall, the -famous village near Huddersfield, to which Bates, the Lockwoods, the -Thewlises and Allan Hill belong. There are several villages and small -towns near Nottingham where cricketers appear indigenous to the soil, -just as primroses are in certain localities. There have always been -cricketers in these parts, and so sure is this constant supply that -some scientific society ought really to go down and inspect the spot, -make a theory to explain the phenomenon, and read a paper about it. -Nottingham itself raised and reared Daft, Shrewsbury, Gunn, Scotton, -and Selby; the famous Sutton-in-Ashfield nursed Morley, J. C. Shaw, -Barnes and Briggs in their infancy. There are several large towns in -Yorkshire, such as Sheffield, Leeds, and other manufacturing centres, -where the traditions of the place are in favour of cricket; but it -is curious to observe that, though it was not so in the days of Noah -Mann, David Harris, and the Hambledon Club, the modern professional now -springs mainly from populous centres. The only reason we can give for -this is that for young players between the ages of eight and eighteen -practice is everything, and of this youngsters can generally make sure -in populous places. In a rural district the same chances may seldom -occur. In Nottingham and the West Riding towns, hundreds of boys may be -seen playing almost at the mouth of coal-pits, and the practice they -get enables them to become professional players. - -Amateurs are not by any means in the same situation. Apart from the -natural qualifications any lad may chance to possess, he is largely -benefited or the reverse by the atmosphere of the schools to which -he is sent. About the age of thirteen he is sent to a large public -school, where cricket is regularly taught, and he has a great deal of -experience if he can manage to get into his school eleven. After that -he may go to Oxford or Cambridge, and if he is fond of the game, he may -play an unlimited quantity of cricket. Many amateurs after they leave -the university disappear for ever from first-class cricket, as their -time then ceases to be their own. - -When we examine the M.C.C. cricket ‘Scores and Biographies,’ we find -the same story over and over again: ‘This year the Gentlemen had to -regret the absence of Messrs. Hankey and Kempson.’ ‘Mr. Felix did not -play for the Gentlemen, they as usual losing one of their best men.’ -In a footnote attached to the score of the 1847 match at Lord’s, the -editor gives a list of no fewer than sixteen gentlemen who had to -abandon the game when in their prime. It was in consequence of this -that in 1862 a match was tried between Gentlemen and Players all under -thirty, but with no better success for the Gentlemen. - -The first Gentlemen and Players’ match took place in 1806 on the old -Lord’s ground, so the contest between these teams is not so old by one -year as the Eton and Harrow. It is true that in ‘The Cricket Field’ -Mr. Pycroft says that Lord F. Beauclerk and the Hons. H. and T. Tufton -had previously made an attempt to get a Gentlemen and Players’ match, -and the Players won, giving the services of T. Walker, Beldham, and -Hammond. These three men were nearly the best in England, and to call -the Players a representative eleven without them was absurd. The same -objection may be mentioned in discussing the next match in 1806, -when the Gentlemen were helped by two of the foremost players: this -made a more equal match, but apparently rather too much was given, -for the amateurs beat the Players in an innings and 14 runs. Beldham -and Lambert were the two given men, and at that time Lambert was -unquestionably the finest player of the day. A second match was played -a fortnight later, when the amateurs were a second time victorious, -and in this case Lambert alone was given. After this match there was -a considerable hiatus, for the rival teams did not meet again till -1819, when a match was played on even terms, the Players winning by six -wickets. Mr. Budd scored 56 for the Gentlemen, and Tom Beagley 75 for -the Players-- - - ... Worthy Beagley, - Who is quite at the top; - With the bat he’s first rate, a brick wall at long-stop. - -Mr. Budd in this match stumped six of the Players, and only one bye was -recorded against him and the long-stop. In 1820 T. C. Howard, who had -bowled for the Players, was transferred to the Gentlemen, and they won -by 70 runs. In 1821 the Gentlemen scored 60 and the Players 278 for six -wickets, at which stage the Gentlemen succumbed and gave up the match. -Beagley, who appeared to be partial to amateur bowling, made 113 not -out, and began the long list of hundreds that have since been obtained -in this match. In 1822 Lord F. Beauclerk bowled finely, Mr. Vigne -stumped four and caught two at the wicket, Mr. Budd made 69 runs, and -the Gentlemen won by six wickets. Elated by this victory, in 1823 the -amateurs again threw down the gauntlet on even terms and were defeated -heavily by 345 runs. - -This knock-down blow must have cowed the Gentlemen, for in the next -four matches they played fourteen, sixteen with Mathews, and seventeen -in the two matches of 1827; and each side won two. In 1828 there was -no match, and in 1829 and 1830 they stole two players to help them. -This was a period when the superiority of the professionals was very -marked, for in 1831, ’32, and ’33 odds were given on each occasion, but -still victory refused to crown the efforts of the amateurs. In 1832 -the Gentlemen defended smaller wickets than those of their opponents, -but the game was admitted to be a failure. The extraordinary result of -all the matches between 1824 and 1833 in which the Gentlemen had odds, -was that out of eight matches the Players won six. The bowling of W. -Lillywhite, Cobbett, and others was far too good for the amateurs, and -the records of the Players were wonderful. - -In 1833, however, for the first time the famous Alfred Mynn appeared -on the scene. This crack amateur was the idol of Kent and the terror -of his opponents. Very tall in stature and heavy in weight, he was at -that time and for many years subsequently one of the fastest bowlers in -England. His physique was enormous, and he could bowl a great number -of balls without any sacrifice of pace or precision. When asked how -many balls he should like the over to consist of, he said as far as he -was concerned he should like a hundred. He was a hard hitter, fond of -driving the ball in front of the wicket, and was probably the champion -at the then frequently played single-wicket matches. It must have been -a fine sight to see Alfred Mynn advance and deliver the ball; he took -a short run and held himself up to nearly his full height as the ball -left his hand. He was of unfailing good humour, and is immortalised in -by far the best cricket poem yet published, which may be found in the -‘Scores and Biographies,’ vol. ii. p. 200. Altogether he was one of -the leading players of his day, and his arrival gave a strength to the -amateurs that was sorely needed, - - Proudly, sadly we will name him--to forget him were a sin; - Lightly lie the turf upon thee, kind and manly Alfred Mynn. - -In 1834 the match was played on even terms, but again the result -was disastrous to the amateurs, for they were beaten in an innings -and 21 runs; nor did the assistance of Cobbett and Redgate, two of -the crack bowlers of the day, save them from defeat in 1835, though -Alfred Mynn scored 53 and bowled down four wickets. In 1836 eighteen -Gentlemen won by 35 runs, and again was Alfred Mynn to the fore, for -he scored 29 and 30 and got eight wickets. In the following year was -played a match, when the Gentlemen defended three wickets, 27 inches -by 8, and the Players four, 36 inches by 12. The match was the famous -‘Barn Door Match,’ or ‘Ward’s Folly,’ but again the impotence of -the amateurs’ batting caused them to be defeated in one innings and -10 runs. Thirteen was the highest amateur score and the only double -figure, and Lillywhite and Redgate apparently did what they liked in -the way of bowling. In 1838 Alfred Mynn was away, so the amateurs -helped themselves to Pilch, Cobbett, and Wenman, three good men from -the professional ranks; they lost the match, however, by 40 runs. -This was the last match in which odds have been given. A drawn game -was played in 1839, and twice the Players were victorious in 1840 and -1841. In 1842 and 1843 the Gentlemen gained two victories, the match in -1842 being their first win on even terms since 1822. Mynn and Sir F. -Bathurst got all the wickets for the Gentlemen; the former scored 21 -and 46, and Mr. Felix played a fine innings of 88, having been missed -badly at short-slip before he scored. In 1843 the Gentlemen actually -won in one innings on even terms, for the first time on record. Again -Alfred Mynn did excellent service, for he made 47 runs and lowered -eight wickets. Mr. C. G. Taylor scored 89 runs and then his hat fell -on the wicket, or rather it was knocked off, which showed that Lord’s -had a way of testing the bravery as well as the skill of batsmen. In -1844 the Gentlemen lost the services of Mr. Felix, perhaps their best -bat, and Sir F. Bathurst, their second best bowler, and were defeated -by 38 runs. The famous William Lillywhite, who ‘handled the ball as he -would do a brick,’ and Hillyer were the crack professional bowlers at -this time, and sad havoc they made of amateur wickets. Lillywhite was -fifty-two years old in 1844, two years older than W. G. Grace, who in -the year 1898 is _par excellence_ the veteran cricketer. The era of -Alfred Mynn and Sir F. Bathurst was the golden age of amateur bowling, -for Mynn was at the top of the tree in this department of the game -for a far longer period than any amateur has been since. He played -twenty matches for the Gentlemen against the Players, and though he -was generally on the losing side, did great things both with bat and -ball, especially with the latter. In 1845 the Players again won, old -Lillywhite, aged fifty-three, taking twelve wickets for 96 runs--a -remarkable performance. - -The match for the year 1846 is an historical one for one or two -reasons. It was the first time that George Parr, aged 20, and William -Clarke, aged 47, represented the Players. Both were Nottingham men; -the younger was very nearly the best bat in England, and the elder, if -not the best bowler all round, certainly by far the most successful -bowler of lobs that has ever appeared. Clarke had played for thirty -seasons before he was chosen to represent the Players. He died in -1856 at the age of 57, played cricket during the last year of his -life, and took a wicket with the last ball he ever bowled. He was head -and captain of the ‘All England Eleven’ which used to tour about the -country. Very amusing work it must have been for old Clarke, bowling -on rough provincial grounds to provincial batsmen; and who can wonder -that he, with several other bowling captains, had a great dislike to -taking himself off? He was one-eyed, having lost his right eye while -indulging in the manly game of fives. He certainly got a lot of wickets -in the best of matches, but there is nothing to guide speculation as -to how Clarke and Lillywhite would have fared if they had bowled to -W. G. Grace and McLaren. Round old Clarke’s head, as round the heads -of Fuller Pilch, Alfred Mynn, and William Lillywhite, an aureole has -gathered; they are the great lights of that epoch of cricket, and -during his career old Clarke must have been one of those few bowlers -who generally made fools of batsmen. - -To return to this year of 1846, as it was Parr and Clarke’s first -Gentlemen and Players, so it was C. G. Taylor’s last. This great -player at all games was an Eton and Cambridge man; and, like many old -cricketers, formed the theme of poets. ‘Taylor the most graceful of -all,’ one writes, and again he is represented as being - - Unlike our common sons, whose gradual ray - Expands from twilight into purer day, - His blaze broke forth at once in full meridian sway. - -Mr. C. G. Taylor was evidently born with an eye; he often ran out to -bowling to drive, could field splendidly either at point, coverpoint, -or mid-wicket, and bowled slow round-arm, we are told, both well and -gracefully. We suspect that, as may be inferred from the description -of his style of play, there was a weak place in his defence, and he -used to have long bouts of small scores. But so graceful and altogether -fascinating was his style, that all his great innings were indelibly -stamped on the memory of those who witnessed them. In this his last -Gentlemen and Players match he got 23 and 44. It was a great match, won -by the Gentlemen by one wicket, and the credit was due to Messrs. R. P. -Long and Taylor for batting, and to Alfred Mynn and Sir F. Bathurst for -bowling. - -In the following year, 1847, the Players again won, but at this period -the sides were far more even than they had been before for any long -time together. The redoubtable bowlers Mynn and Bathurst were helped by -Harvey Fellows, the celebrated Etonian, and George Yonge the Oxonian; -and we doubt if the Gentlemen have ever been so strong in this line -since. These two bowled out the Players in 1848 for 79 and 77 runs, -Mynn getting eight wickets in the second innings and hitting up 66 -runs. In this year, in fact, it is a question if the amateurs were not -stronger in bowling than batting. - -In the next year, 1849, further triumph awaited the amateurs, for -winning the toss they scored 192 runs, compelled the Players to follow -on, and won the match in one innings and 40 runs. Alfred Mynn did not -get a wicket, but Harvey Fellows bowled his fastest, first hurt his -opponents, and then got them out. Old Wm. Lillywhite played his last -Gentlemen and Players match this year, and we read that he refused to -bat in his second innings because he was hurt by Mr. Fellows. He was 57 -years old, so may be excused if he felt a little nervous on old Lord’s -ground at standing up to one who used to make the ball hum like a top. - -The famous ‘Nonpareil bowler,’ as old Lillywhite was called, was the -king of bowlers in the days when he flourished. Mr. Robert Grimston, -who remembered him well, said that though a slow bowler he was quicker -off the ground than Alfred Shaw. He lived in the days when wides were -common, but it is recorded that during his whole career he did not -deliver half a dozen. He was born in Sussex in 1792, and played as a -given man for the Gentlemen in 1829 and 1830; after that began his -long career as principal bowler for the Players. He was, therefore, -no less than 39 years of age when he played his first match for the -Players. If to other cricketers may be given the credit of inventing -round-arm bowling, still to Lillywhite and Broadbridge all honour is -due for having been the first really good round-arm bowlers. Lillywhite -bowled in seventeen matches against the Gentlemen and got 132 wickets, -or close upon eight wickets per match. He was occasionally useful as a -bat, and though he refused to go in, as just recorded, he had plenty -of pluck when younger, for in a single wicket match he stood up for -278 balls to George Brown, to whose bowling Little Dench of Brighton -used to long-stop with a sack stuffed full of straw to protect his -chest. Batting gloves were not used in those days, and Lillywhite had -his fingers broken three times before they were invented. Fuller Pilch -played his last Gentlemen and Players match this year, which is famous -for witnessing the farewell of such great cricketers as himself and -William Lillywhite. Pilch was born in 1803, and was therefore 46 years -old in 1849. - - Another young tailor, as fine a young man - As e’er hit a ball and then afterwards ran. - -Pilch was undoubtedly the champion of his day, and his mantle fell on -George Parr. He was the originator of what we call in modern times -‘forward play,’ and his object was the sound one of smothering the ball -at the pitch. He was the worst enemy of William Clarke, for he left -his ground to balls that were well up and ran him down with a straight -bat. He was one of the dauntless five that carried Kent into a unique -position among cricket counties. - - And with five such mighty cricketers ’twas but natural to win, - As Felix, Wenman, Hillyer, Fuller Pilch, and Alfred Mynn. - -In 1850 the famous Johnny Wisden came to the front and the Players -grew stronger, and George Parr made 65 runs not out. Wisden and Clarke -bowled unchanged, and got rid of their rivals for 42 and 58, winning -the match in one innings and 48 runs in 1850, and in 1851 they also -won in a single innings. Wisden, Grundy, and Caffyn were three fine -all-round men, and Joe Guy of Nottingham was apparently quite at home -to amateur bowling. Both Mynn and Fellows had lost their devil, or -perhaps it might be more correct to say that the latter had lost his -straightness and accuracy. In 1852 the Players won by five wickets, and -the great Alfred Mynn retires from the scene as far as this match is -concerned. - -In 1853 fine bowling won the Gentlemen a match by 60 runs. Both Sir F. -Bathurst and Mr. Kempson bowled unchanged all through the two innings -of the Players, and got rid of them for 42 and 69. Martingell got seven -wickets for 19 runs in the second innings of the Gentlemen, so this -was essentially a bowlers’ match; and though it is an historical fact -that it was the first time the Gentlemen never had to change their -bowling, in 1846 Mynn and Sir F. Bathurst got all the wickets, and Mr. -Taylor was only on for a few overs. Sir F. Bathurst might therefore -have bowled one end all the time if Mr. Taylor had relieved Mynn. At -any rate, to Sir F. Bathurst is due the credit of being one of the main -causes of two defeats of the Players. He was a fast bowler with a low -delivery, but very straight. - -In 1854 both sides played weak, four Players refusing to come forward -because of a dispute between Clarke and the M.C.C., and the Gentlemen -losing Messrs. Hankey and Kempson. An uneventful match was the result, -and the Players again won. From 1853 to 1865 the match was played -on even terms, but the Players had a run of victory, and not once -during that time did the Gentlemen prove successful. There is no doubt -that the batting strength of the Players during these years was very -considerable, and, though George Parr, Hayward, and Carpenter did not -score their hundreds as the men of modern times so often have done, -they made their fifties and sixties with nearly the same consistency. -Parr was a most regular scorer during the decade between 1853 and 1863, -and his average for the whole series of these matches must have been -very high. - -In 1855 the Players won easily by seven wickets, though the -Gentlemen began well; but in their second innings Dean and John -Lillywhite got them out for 43, five consecutive wickets falling -without a run. In 1857 the Gentlemen lost several of their best men, -but the famous Oxonians, Messrs. Marsham and Payne, bowled finely, -and though the Players had only 70 to get to win, they only pulled -through by two wickets. Willsher played this year for the first time, -and he and Wisden were too much for the Gentlemen. The year 1857 was -an historical one for two reasons. In the first place at Lord’s was -played one of the closest matches of the series, a game also famous -for one of those great batting feats the recollection of which lingers -long; and in the second place because a second match was played for the -first time at the Oval. The historical innings was that of Mr. Reginald -Hankey, whom George Parr considers the finest bat he ever saw. This is -the proverbial effort quoted by all who saw it as the masterpiece of -its day, and Mr. Grace himself has never played an innings that made -more sensation. Mr. Hankey got 70 runs in an hour and three-quarters, -and hit the fast bowling of Willsher, Wisden, Jackson, and Stephenson -all over the ground. Messrs. Hankey, Haygarth, Drake and Lane amassed -224 runs, the other seven only 58 between them, and in the end the -players won by 13 runs. Mr. Drake played his hardest to win, making a -score of 58 out of 114. - -[Illustration: Kennington Oval, 1854.] - -At the Oval the Players won easily by ten wickets, and on this ground -the Gentlemen lost every match till 1866. In those days the Oval was -what we should call a better ground than Lord’s--that is to say, it -was more in favour of the batsmen and long scores; and consequently -the weak amateur bowling was at a considerable discount. In 1858 at -the Oval the Players won by three wickets, and R. Daft played for the -Gentlemen for the first and only time. At Lord’s in the same year the -Gentlemen collapsed in batting and lost by 285 runs, the bowling of -Jackson being at this period an object of dread among the amateurs. -In 1859 the Players won both matches easily, and the famous Robert -Carpenter made his first appearance, scoring 44 runs at the Oval. - -In 1860, at the Oval, the Players won by eight wickets; Mr. T. E. -Bagge made two scores of 62 and 60, and the scoring altogether was -very large for those days. Carpenter made 119 in his one innings. At -Lord’s the other great Cambridgeshire player, Tom Hayward, came on the -scene with a vengeance, scoring 132 runs, and the Players won in one -innings and 181 runs, though George Parr could not play. At this time -the tremendous bowling of Jackson and Willsher was at its best, and -Hayward, Carpenter, Parr, and Daft were too good for amateur bowling. -In 1861 the Players won in one innings and 60 runs at Lord’s, and in -one innings and 68 runs at the Oval; Carpenter for the second time -making a hundred. - -In 1862 a famous drawn match was played at the Oval. Over 200 runs were -made in each innings, and there was curious equality of scoring, the -highest figures on each side being 108, made by Mr. John Walker for -the Gentlemen, and by Hayward for the Players. The match was drawn, -the Players having lost eight wickets and still wanting 33 runs. Mr. -Walker was bowling lobs a good deal in this match, and whilst Anderson -and Stephenson were batting just before stumps were drawn at the end -of the day, each having made 33, the famous Tom Lockyer, who could -not endure lobs, was continually to be seen nervously looking at the -clock; to go in against these dreaded balls was a privilege he did not -covet. Willsher, Parr, and Daft could not play for the Players, nor -Messrs. Makinson and Mitchell for the Gentlemen. At Lord’s a match was -played between the elevens, all the engaged being under thirty, and -the Players won by 157 runs. Mr. C. D. Marsham, the steadiest of all -Gentlemen bowlers, played his last Gentlemen and Players match this -year. He had taken part in ten matches, but never had the good luck to -be on the winning side. - -In 1863 the great Hayward made 112 runs in his only innings, and -nobody else except Mr. Walker got 30 runs in the match, which the -Players won by eight wickets, Jackson and Tarrant being quite -unplayable on the rough Lord’s wicket. Mr. R. A. H. Mitchell played -for the first time, and, with the exception of Mr. Grace, no greater -batsman has appeared for the Gentlemen, though he did not play for -many years. At the Oval in the same year Mr. Mitchell scored 76 and 6; -but the Gentlemen were weak in bowling, and the Players won by nine -wickets. At Lord’s in 1864 Tarrant and Willsher bowled unchanged during -the match, and the Gentlemen scored 119 in the two innings; but at the -Oval there were a lot of runs made, Stephenson putting together 117, -and Messrs. C. G. Lyttelton and Makinson playing two fine innings for -the Gentlemen. - -In 1865 began what brought about a revolution in cricket, for W. G. -Grace played his first match, and at once began to score. Originally -more famous as a bowler, he has since made runs in a manner and to an -extent altogether unparalleled in the history of cricket, and soon -after his appearance the almost dull monotony of professional victory -was changed for the almost equally dull monotony of professional -defeat. When he first began to play there was a schism in the -professional ranks which lasted several years; between 1863 and 1871, -many of the crack Northern players refused to play at the Oval, and -soon afterwards at Lord’s also. It is a curious fact that at Lord’s in -1865 the amateurs won by eight wickets, scoring a victory for the first -time since 1853, after losing nineteen matches in succession. This was -W. G. Grace’s first match and George Parr’s last, the latter having -scored sixty runs in his actual last innings. Grace was sixteen years -old, and Parr, who first played in 1846, was 39. Parr’s average for -these matches was no less than twenty-eight, and his was altogether one -of the best and longest careers ever seen. - -Up to 1886 Mr. Grace had played 78 innings in these matches, and -averaged 45 runs an innings. From that date to the present he has -averaged 26 runs an innings; and it is not easy to say that anybody -is his superior now in 1893. The cricket schism weakened the Players -very much for several years at the beginning of his career, and the -matches were in consequence not so interesting. At the Oval, in 1866, -the Gentlemen followed their innings, but won the match by 98 runs, and -this was the first time they were successful at the Kennington ground; -but no Northern players appeared except Grundy, Wootton, Luke Greenwood -and Alfred Shaw. It was the same story in 1867 and in every match -till 1872; the amateurs were generally successful. Since that period, -however, it has always been considered a special honour to be asked to -represent either eleven, and the Committees at both Lord’s and the Oval -now offer higher terms to the professionals for this than for any other -match. For some reason which we are totally unable to explain, between -the years 1867 and 1877 there was a blight on the Players. Their -batting fell off to an extraordinary extent, nor was their fast bowling -at all up to the level of what it used to be. Of course W. G. Grace -was the main cause of the apparent weakness of the bowling, but this -could not account for the great batting deterioration. The Players won -at the Oval in 1865 and did not win again till 1880, though one match -was drawn considerably in their favour. Up to 1874, including the Oval -matches and omitting three unfinished, the Players lost twelve matches -in succession, mainly owing to Mr. Grace. - -If we take the best of the innings of 100 played in these matches to -the year 1893, we find that there have been 41 individual innings of -over 100 runs played, and Mr. Grace has played eleven himself, or -nearly a third of the whole; and when we remember that he has had a -great deal of bowling to do as well, it may be said with confidence -that no such performances for so many years have ever been seen in the -history of cricket. In 1873 he got 163 runs at Lord’s, and 158 at the -Oval, and in the latter match scored seven wickets in the Players’ -second innings. In 1874 the Gentlemen won by seven wickets, having -to go in for 226 runs to win. Mr. Grace had got 77 runs in his first -innings, went in first in the second innings, stayed in till 152 runs -were scored, and was then out for 112. The match was won by seven -wickets. - -The most exciting match that has occurred was in the year 1877. The -Players made 192, and the Gentlemen 198 in the first innings, and the -players 148 in the second. Consequently, to win the match 143 runs were -wanted by the Gentlemen. The wicket was not quite a first-rate one, -and good judges anticipated a close finish. Grace made 41, and Alfred -Lyttelton 20; but Watson, Ulyett, and Morley bowled well, and the -Gentlemen wanted 46 runs to win when nine wickets had fallen. Mr. W. S. -Patterson and G. F. Grace were in, and gradually, by excellent play, -the runs were secured. In 1888 there was another most exciting match at -Lord’s, when both sides were the strongest that could have been chosen, -except that Shrewsbury did not assist the Players. The wicket was very -difficult from start to finish, and the Players only required 78 runs -to win. It was Mr. Woods’ first year of first-class cricket, and he -obtained ten wickets for 76 runs. His bowling, together with that of -Mr. Smith and Mr. Steel, got the Players out for 72, and the Gentlemen -won the match by 5 runs. - -In 1883 a tie match was played at the Oval, for the first and only -time. The wicket was difficult on the third day, and the Gentlemen, -who lost the services of Mr. W. G. Grace for the first time since -1867, were 31 runs ahead on the first innings. Bates did well for the -Players in the second innings and scored 76 runs, making his last 30 -runs in eight hits. Rain fell in the night, and Flowers found a spot. -Mr. Lucas, who scored 47 not out, was really caught at point when he -had got 8, but the catch was a low one, and neither umpire would give a -decision when appealed to. So he continued his innings, which was hard -for the Players. Fourteen were wanted when Mr. Rotherham joined Mr. -Lucas, and when 8 runs were wanted Bates badly missed Rotherham. When -the match was a tie, Peate was put on, and clean bowled Rotherham with -his second ball. The Players had rather hard lines in Lucas’s case, but -they lost the match through the bad miss of Bates. - -In 1879, following the good example set by Sir F. Bathurst and Kempson, -the Gentlemen won the Oval match without once having to change their -bowlers. Messrs. Steel and Evans were the heroes; Evans got ten -wickets, and Steel nine. The wicket was difficult, but the batting was -feeble, and only realised totals of 73 and 48. - -For the last few years the Players have gradually recovered their lost -prestige, and reached the high-water mark of excellence in 1887, when, -for the first time since 1861, they won both matches in one innings -each. At the date of writing (1898) the two sides present very much the -same features as have distinguished them hitherto. The amateurs are as -strong, and perhaps a little stronger in batting, the professionals -much stronger in bowling, though not perhaps so much so as at most -previous epochs; but there is one remarkable difference, and that is -in wicket-keeping. In old days the professionals were vastly superior -to the amateurs; now there is practically nothing between them, and -this fact is probably because of the greater accuracy of modern -amateur bowling, which makes it easier to take, and does not knock the -wicket-keeper about so much. - -A survey of the whole series of matches points to the fact that, as -is natural, the Gentlemen have been, and probably will be, beaten as -a general rule. Every cricketer knows what it is to play in an eleven -with a comrade, either a batsman or bowler, of commanding superiority. -Such a man makes an eleven. He does this by giving confidence to the -other ten members of the team. They feel that the match does not depend -on them, that if they fail he will pull them through, and consequently -they go in boldly and score. The two notable instances of one man -making an eleven are W. G. Grace and Spofforth. Of course there were -good players amongst the Australians and amongst the Gentlemen, but -the presence of Grace and Spofforth was an incalculable benefit. The -Australians began a match feeling sure that, even if they did not run -up large scores, Spofforth would get rid of their opponents for less. - -In conclusion, let us express a hope that the Gentlemen and Players -match will never fall through: for, having been played off and on -since 1806, it has a notable history, and it ought to be the summit of -ambition in every cricketer, be he amateur or professional, to appear -in these great classic contests. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII. - -THE ART OF TRAINING YOUNG CRICKETERS. - -(BY R. A. H. MITCHELL.) - - -[Illustration: A six-year old.] - -If you want to play cricket you must begin as a boy, is a true, if -not an original, remark. We remember asking a member of a well-known -cricketing fraternity what promise a younger brother gave of future -excellence, and his reply was, ‘He’s no good--but then he hasn’t had a -chance, for he was so delicate he couldn’t begin till he was six years -old.’ We do not ourselves presume to say that the game must necessarily -be learnt whilst a child is under his nurse’s care; but nevertheless we -know of no instance, unless Mr. A. E. Stoddart forms an exception to -the rule, of anyone attaining to the first rank who has not received -his early lessons in the noble game while still a boy. If this be so, -it is of interest to all cricketers to consider what training a boy -ought to have. Is he to be left merely to the light of nature and his -own powers of observation, or is he to be systematically coached, and -taught daily how each stroke is to be made and each ball bowled? Many -think that a training of this kind can hardly be begun too soon or -carried out with too great care and rigour. This may be so; but we -are by no means inclined to agree with such a Spartan discipline. We -believe that in games, as in life, if a thing is worth doing at all, -it is worth doing well; but, although we claim to be second to none in -our keenness to see good boy cricketers, we differ in the method we -advocate from those who support so severe a system of coaching young -boys. - -Let us give some reasons in support of our view. In the first place, -success in cricket, and not in cricket alone, depends on the enjoyment -and interest taken in the game, and we believe that there is great -danger of destroying this enjoyment and interest by incessant coaching -and teaching at too early an age. In the second place, all coaching has -a tendency at first to eradicate individual peculiarities and to cramp -a natural style. Mr. W. G. Grace, Mr. A. G. Steel, Shrewsbury, and many -other well-known batsmen have peculiarities of their own, which could -not have been taught in early boyhood, but which might very easily -have been cramped, and perhaps entirely obliterated, much to their -detriment, in the hands of even a skilful coach. We do not deprecate -all advice even to very young boys, but we dislike anything that tends -to interfere with the powers of nature; and although we shall be told -that a good teacher merely directs them in the best possible way, we do -not think that the advantage likely to be gained will at all compensate -for a cramped style or loss of enjoyment. What should be taught, and -when, we will endeavour to suggest as we proceed. - -[Illustration: OUR NATIONAL GAME] - -First, however, one word to anxious parents and teachers of the art. -It is quite hopeless to expect that every boy can be made into a -cricketer. Countless are the excuses we hear to cover the feebleness -and incapacity of would-be players, made sometimes by their parents, -sometimes by themselves. They have never been coached, or they have -been badly coached; they have been made to play too much, or they -can’t play often enough; the ground they play on is so rough, or it is -so easy that they can’t play on more difficult ground. They used to -bowl very well; but they were overbowled, or they were never put on; -or they are always put on at the wrong end, or the catches are always -missed off their bowling. These and many other excuses are urged on -their behalf; but those who have watched cricket for but a few years -will soon learn to take such futile pleas for what they are worth. No -boy can become a good cricketer who has not a natural capacity for the -game. The batsman must have a good eye and is all the better for a good -nerve; the fieldsman must be active; the bowler--ah! what must he have? -_Nascitur non fit_; we will not commit ourselves at present to his -requirements. - -In saying this do not let it be supposed that we wish those only to -play cricket who are likely to become good cricketers--far from it; but -we are concerned with the game as an art and not as an exercise, and do -not wish to raise vain hopes of success where success is impossible. - -Now let us consider the three great departments of the game in detail; -for, although they are necessarily and closely connected, we cannot -treat of batting, bowling, and fielding in the same paragraph. - -The batsman then first demands our attention, not because he is more -useful to his side than the bowler, but because it is here that more -may be taught than in any other department of the game. Take a boy ten -years old--we start with double figures, let it be an omen for his -future!--what can we tell him? Very little, we think, but certainly -this: never to move his right foot, but to plant it firmly just inside -the crease, with the toe barely clear of the leg-stump. - -The left foot should also be placed in the same line, but it must be -moved into the position which is found to be the easiest for playing or -hitting any given ball. The batsman must learn to stand perfectly still -with his eye fixed on the bowler’s hand, and he must try to think of -the ball, and the ball alone; any fidgeting about is apt to interfere -with an accurate habit of sight. A boy should also be told to drive the -ball in front of the wicket and along the ground. We do not approve -of the cut for young boys; it is the batsman’s most finished stroke, -but it is absolutely fatal when attempted at an unsuitable ball. This -is all we think it necessary to teach our juvenile batsman, though -occasional hints beyond this may sometimes be useful. Do not, however, -cramp a boy who is disposed to hit, but tell him to hit straight; it is -easier at a later age to stop hitting than to teach it. For this reason -single-wicket matches among small boys are not without their use, as -they naturally encourage hard hitting in front of the wicket. - -A danger which is not sufficiently guarded against at some private -schools is the habit of allowing young boys to play to fast bowling; -masters and others take part in the games and the practice, and bowl at -a pace which would be called medium in a man’s match, but which is very -fast for boys under fourteen years of age. The result of this is that -boys learn to be afraid of the ball; and if they once show fear they -will never become good players. It seems all but impossible to restore -confidence even at a much later age, and we know of many instances--we -will not be so unkind as to mention names--in which boys with great -natural powers have never overcome their fear of the ball, which they -had acquired before coming to a public school. For the same reason the -growing custom of small boys playing in men’s matches is to be strongly -deprecated. - -[Illustration: LUCIEN DAVIS - -Drawing away from the wicket.] - -Boys’ matches we strongly approve of, but boys of fourteen and under -ought not to play in matches with full-grown men. If a boy with a -natural gift for cricket has learnt by the time he enters a public -school to stand firmly and play the ball in front of the wicket, he has -learnt all that is necessary to turn him out a good batsman later on; -but if fast bowling has taught him to fear the ball, we have but little -hope of ever seeing him attain to the first class. - -A few years have elapsed, and our young batsman at the age of thirteen -or fourteen is passing into the larger sphere of a public school. What -ought to be his training there? - -It cannot be expected that he will receive the same attention that will -be given at a later age, when he is a candidate for his school eleven, -nor do we think that he need be subjected to any rigorous system of -coaching. On the other hand, he ought to have some one of experience -to give him occasional hints and instil into him the true principles -of the game. Above everything else, he should have good ground to play -upon, so that, if his confidence has not been previously shaken, he -will not now learn to shrink from the ball. The question of ground must -always be a great difficulty; for, although it may be easy to get an -extent sufficient to satisfy the requirements of a large public school, -it is no easy matter to keep it in proper order and provide good match -and practice wickets throughout the summer for a large number of boys, -especially as the ground is generally required for football or other -purposes during the winter. However, the better the ground the better -the batsmen; and if this be true, a good ground is one of the most -important requirements in the training of our cricketers. - -As a boy grows in years he will require, and will probably get, -more instruction, and if he meets with a coach of good judgment and -experience he will soon learn all that can be taught. His success will -depend on his own natural powers, his temper, and his perseverance. We -do not propose to deal in detail with all the duties of a coach, but -perhaps a few hints may not be altogether out of place. - -First of all, then, we would say, do not coach a boy too often. Once a -week is all that is either necessary or desirable. A boy who is anxious -to learn will lay to heart the hints and instructions he has received, -and he will find it easier to carry them out when he is practising with -his schoolfellows than when he is actually receiving instruction from a -coach. A new attitude or a new stroke always presents great difficulty, -easy as it may seem in itself; and a boy who is trying something new -will not at first play better, and will become nervous and disheartened -if he is being too constantly pressed by an ardent teacher. - -Do not let a boy practise for more than half an hour at a time, or he -will become careless and lose interest. During that time he should play -to both fast and slow bowling, but never to more than two bowlers; and -it would be well if he could play for a quarter of an hour to two slow -bowlers, and another quarter to two fast. It is confusing to some boys -to receive fast and slow balls alternately, particularly when they are -trying to alter or improve some point of style under the direction of a -coach. - -Do not allow boys to play to fast bowling on bad wickets: slow bowling -on a bad wicket is a good lesson occasionally, as it necessitates -careful watching of the ball and accurate timing; but fast bowling -on bumpy ground can only do harm. Never allow throwing instead of -bowling,--it does infinite mischief. - -A coach will naturally have to give instruction on numerous points, and -try to get his pupil to carry out what he teaches; but there is one -warning which must be impressed on the lad more strongly than anything -else. It is this: when you go to the wicket in a match don’t be -thinking of this or that position, or this or that stroke, but fix your -eye on the bowler’s hand as he comes up to bowl. Think of and watch -the ball only; if you learn correct habits in practice, your instinct -will throw you into the right position and enable you to make the right -stroke, provided that your eye does not fail you with the ball. - -We do not purpose to describe how each stroke should be made or to -enumerate all the instructions that should be given to the youthful -batsman; for such details would be long and wearisome, and entirely -unnecessary for the guidance of anyone who understands the true -principles of the game; and certainly no one ought to try and teach -until he has (at all events theoretically) mastered these, though it -is by no means necessary for a good coach to be himself a first-rate -exponent of the batsman’s art. We would point out, however, that, -apart from natural gifts, over which the coach has no control, the -most important point to teach the batsman is first to watch the -ball; secondly, to throw himself at the right moment into the right -position--if he can do this, it is an easy matter to hit or play almost -any given ball; thirdly, to meet the ball either in playing back or -forward, and not to play in front of the left foot when playing forward -or behind the right when playing back. - -And now what are we to say of the bowler’s art? How are we to teach -our boys the most unteachable department of the game? This part of our -subject we approach with many misgivings, and though we wish to limit -our advice to what is strictly practical, we feel that this very limit -will make many think that our hints are but meagre and uninteresting. - -We must again ‘put back the clock’ (oh that some of us decrepit -cricketers could do so in reality!) to the age of ten. Again we ask -for some natural power of propelling a ball with ease, strength -proportioned to age, perseverance, and a real love of the game. Given -these materials to work upon, how are we to begin? First of all, let -the distance be short, certainly not more than eighteen yards at the -age of ten; let the ball be smaller and lighter than the regulation -size, and let a boy be taught at first to aim only at one length; as he -becomes fairly master of straightness and pitch, let him try to vary -the length a little, but not too often, or he may sacrifice regularity -and injure his delivery. Change of pace can hardly be looked for at -this age; but great care should be taken to prevent a boy from bowling -fast, and he should not bowl for long together. In practice it is a -good plan to take alternate overs with another boy, as it is easier -to bowl four or five balls well and then rest than to go on bowling a -greater number. A boy should be taught to measure the distance he runs -before delivering the ball, and he should learn to bowl on both sides -of the wicket. Great care should be taken to prevent a boy from bowling -too much; and if his bowling seems to be getting worse rather than -better, let him leave off for some days. We offer no advice on the more -abstruse arts of bowling, as the subject has been exhaustively treated -in a previous chapter. - -Supposing that our boy bowler has by the age of fourteen acquired -straightness and pitch, with some power of variation, will he have a -fair chance of improving his bowling and distinguishing himself when -at a public school? We fear that this will be a trying time--indeed -must be so, even if he is taken in hand by some one who understands -and takes an interest in the game. In the first place, batting is more -attractive to most boys; in the second, the young bowler will probably -have a very indifferent field, and the missing of catches tempts -the youthful player to abandon the slower pace for the faster, with -disastrous results to himself. Almost all young boys wish to bowl as -fast as they can, and this ends frequently in ruining a good action and -a good arm which had at one time threatened the fall of many a good -wicket. - -At this point, then, in a bowler’s career, public schools, we think, -have something to answer for; but we do not agree with those who say -that subsequently, when a boy is old enough to be a candidate for his -school eleven, there is any great lack of system or careful training. -Rather, if a short digression may be pardoned, we think that the -Universities, or the laziness of University men, may chiefly be blamed -for the dearth of gentlemen bowlers. Our argument shortly stated is -this. If we compare gentlemen bowlers of the age of nineteen with -professionals of the same age, we shall find that the former have -nothing to fear from the comparison. But pass on for five or six years, -and the gentlemen are seen to be behind in the race for pre-eminence. -Can this be the fault of public schools? Is it not rather that after -leaving school few, scarcely any, systematically practise bowling, -although they are just at the right age to improve, having stronger -muscles and more experience, to say nothing of leisure hours and -increased opportunities? If University men would practise their bowling -both at nets and in matches with the same assiduity that boys do at -a public school, we think that it would approach more nearly to the -professional standard than it now does. - -We do not propose to offer our readers any special advice as to the -method of attack, which will naturally vary with different batsmen. -Experience and observation will suggest what may be done, if we can -only teach our young bowler to bowl straight, to vary his length, and -as he gets older his pace, and if nature has given him strength, and a -happy genius enables him to make the ball turn more or less at will. -Let us leave the bowler himself, and see if we can offer any hints on -providing him with a good field. - -It is a common fallacy to suppose that anyone can field well if he -takes the trouble to do so. With this we cannot agree; but we feel -strongly that most cricketers might improve themselves very much in -this department if they took the same pains they do to improve their -batting. - -But we must return to our small boys. First of all, let us teach them -to catch by throwing the ball from one to another, and let the ball be -small, proportioned to the size of their hands. Teach them to take the -catch opposite the upper part of the chest, when they can get to it -in that position, and to draw their hands back as the ball comes into -them. Do not keep them too long at this, or they will find it irksome. -Vary with a little ground fielding, but do not let them throw too -often or too far, or their arms will soon go, and you will ruin your -bowlers and your throwers as well. It is not, however, at this early -age that the most special attention ought to be given to fielding. It -is rather at our public schools that we here look for improvement; this -is the time at which we think most may be done. As a boy gains strength -and activity he gains two of the qualities most necessary for a good -fieldsman, and if nature has given him a good big pair of hands and -the power of throwing, it will be owing to his laziness if he does not -become a valuable aid to any bowler. We might dwell on the necessity -of keenness, watchfulness in the field, position for starting, and -many other essentials, but we have said enough for practical purposes; -all else will be easily learnt by a boy who has the energy and -determination to train himself into a good field. - -It will be noticed that in our suggestions to the batsman we have not -advised him to make that use of his legs in defending his wicket which -now finds such favour with our leading players. We confess to regarding -this as an ignoble art; but we admit that if the l.b.w. rule is to -continue as at present, the art, ignoble as it is, must be taught in -self-defence, or our pupils will necessarily be handicapped in being -expected to stop balls which break and turn with their bat instead of -with their legs. Fortunately age will relieve us personally of teaching -how this may best be done. It is for the rising generation either to -alter the law or to learn the art of getting in front of the wicket -when the ball does not pitch straight. - -It is in vain to lament over long scores and unfinished matches, -over dearth of bowlers and slackness in the field, whilst all the -time we are doing everything we can to make matters easier and easier -for the batsman, giving him perfect wickets, on which he can score -100 runs without getting out of breath, devoting his legs to the new -purpose of systematically intercepting the more difficult balls. How -different this from having honestly to run out every hit, and from -being compelled to play a real ‘snorter’ before the breath is fairly -recovered after the effort of running several fourers in succession! - - - - -CHAPTER XIV. - -SINGLE WICKET. - -(BY THE HON. R. H. LYTTELTON.) - - -It is necessary in any work which professes to treat of cricket -generally, that the laws and regulations of single wicket should be -discussed, though the subject is not of much importance in these days; -for, as far as first-class cricket is concerned, the game played with -only one wicket has vanished altogether. Some few years ago, if an -ordinary three-day match were over early, a scratch single-wicket match -was sometimes improvised; but the effect was generally depressing. - -Few people now take the trouble to read through the rules which govern -single-wicket matches, and the almost total disappearance of such games -may be mainly attributed to two circumstances: (1) The great increase -in the number of three-day matches; (2) the diminution in the number of -fast bowlers. - -In the days of Alfred Mynn and Fuller Pilch matches practically never -took more than two days, and first-class contests were in number about -one-half what they are at present. A professional of the front rank, -such as Lohmann or Barnes, now has to play two matches a week, and if -a match is over on the second day, he is only too glad to have a rest -before beginning again elsewhere, it may be more than a hundred miles -away. The public also have the opportunity of seeing such a quantity of -first-class play, that there is no demand for single-wicket matches. - -In the second place, the rules of single-wicket cricket make it -essential that driving in front of the wicket must be the staple stroke -of the batsman, and for this reason, because the second rule provides -that, to entitle the striker to a run, the ball must be hit before the -bounds. Now the bounds are placed twenty-two yards each in a line from -the off and leg stump, and there must be bounds unless there are more -than four players on each side. The third rule compels the striker -at the moment of hitting the ball to have one of his feet behind the -popping crease and on the ground. These two laws contain the essence -of the game of cricket as played with a single wicket. It is not sound -cricket to play any bowling that may be called slow in the widest sense -of the term with your right foot absolutely fixed. In the chapter on -Batting the young player is advised to go out of his ground to slow -bowling of a certain length and drive. But at single wicket the batsman -may not move even an inch in front of the popping crease, to get a lob, -for instance, on the full pitch. So the effect of bowling slows in a -single-wicket match is that a batsman must abandon what may be called -the orthodox and correct method of play, and merely wait till he gets -a ball far enough up for him to drive it without getting out of his -ground. - -No correct player can ever drive slows, unless they are right up, -without going out of his ground, and a great many would be so cramped -that they would be at a disadvantage altogether, and obliged to play an -ugly pokey game. If a slow bowler with perhaps two or three fields were -bowling to Mr. Webbe, who plays slows as well as anybody in England, -that gentleman would find himself obliged to abandon his natural game, -stand still, watch the ball carefully, and play it gently, till he got -a real half-volley or outrageous long-hop, off which he could score. -But if certain skilful bowlers were on, the batsman would very likely -have to wait the best part of an hour before such a ball came; and it -would be sadly dull to watch such a game. - -If five play on a side bounds are abolished, the slow bowling may get -hit behind the wicket, and so the game becomes considerably livelier. -The run consists of touching the bowler’s stump with the bat and -getting back to the popping crease. Thus one run at single wicket is -exactly equivalent to two at double wicket. To get three runs in one -hit if there are two fields is almost an impossibility, though it has -been done. There is no wicket-keeper, and nothing can be scored by -byes, leg-byes, or overthrows. To run a man out, it is necessary that -the bowler run to the wicket and put it down, unless of course it is -thrown down. The fieldsman must return the ball so that it shall cross -the ground between the wicket and the bowling stump, or between the -bowling stump and the bounds; and three are scored for a lost ball. - -In very ancient times five players a side used often to contend at -single wicket, and in this sort of match there are no bounds, though -the batsman must have his right or left foot on the ground behind the -popping crease when the ball is hit. - -Single-wicket matches were once very common. Indeed, during the last -century they were played nearly as often as double-wicket games, and we -will briefly notice some of the most famous. - -In the year 1772 five of Kent with Minshull beat five of the famous -Hambledon Club by one wicket, but in 1773 the same five men of -Hambledon vanquished five men of England. Happy village of Hambledon -that could thus defeat All England, a deed that at double wicket no -county could accomplish now! With the redoubtable Lumpy given, the -same village in 1781 beat England by 78 runs, five players on a side. -In the following year six of Hambledon beat six of Kent, and the Duke -of Dorset, Privy Councillor, Knight of the Garter, and Lord Steward of -the King’s Household, played for the village against his own county, -for what reason history telleth not. John Nyren says that this nobleman -‘had the peculiar habit, when unemployed, of standing with his head on -one side.’ He is also celebrated in verse: - - Equalled by few he plays with glee, - Nor peevish seeks for victory. - His Grace for bowling cannot yield - To none but Lumpy in the field. - And far unlike the modern way - Of blocking every ball at play, - He firmly stands with bat upright - And strikes with his athletic might, - Sends forth the ball across the mead, - And scores six notches for the deed. - -The Duke must have been the first who conceived the idea of -international cricket; for while ambassador in France he wrote to -Golden, of Chertsey, to form an eleven to play at Paris. Unfortunately, -when they had got as far as Dover, they met his Grace, who had to flee -the faithless Frenchmen in consequence of a revolution, and the match -was abandoned. - -Six of Hambledon again beat six of England in 1783, but six of Kent -defeated the village in 1786. This was a famous match, though seeing -T. Walker batting for nearly five hours for 26 runs must have been a -trifle monotonous. A Kent player named Ring went in when 59 runs were -wanted to win and two more wickets to go down. He made 15 overnight, -and Sir Horace Mann promised him a pension if he carried out his bat, -and, we presume, won the match. He failed to do so, but got out when 2 -runs were wanted. Aylward then went in and played 94 balls before he -made the winning hit. We hope Sir Horace Mann gave the pension to Ring, -for he must have deserved it. - -Six of Hampshire twice beat England in 1788, and in 1789 a drawn match -was played between six of Kent and six of Hants. In this match betting -at the start was 5 to 4 on Hants, but David Harris was seized with -the gout, and the betting, therefore, stood at 5 to 4 on Kent. David -Harris used sometimes to walk to the ground on crutches, but bowled -splendidly, we are told, when he got warm. - -In 1806, three of Surrey--William Lambert, Robinson, and William -Beldham--beat three of England--Bennett, Fennex, and Lord F. -Beauclerk--by 20 runs. This was the famous match when Beldham, father -of thirty-nine children--none, so far as we know, cricketers--took -a lump of wet dirt and sawdust, and stuck it on to the ball, which -developed an extraordinary twist and bowled Lord Frederick out. His -lordship was of an irritable disposition, and must have been very angry -at this, for he had made 30 runs and was well set. - -In 1814, Osbaldeston, Budd, and Lord F. Beauclerk beat three of -England--Sherman, T. C. Howard, and Lambert. The famous Squire -Osbaldeston clean bowled all his rivals in each innings for 19 runs -only. The Squire, whose reputation as an all-round sportsman still -survives, was the fastest bowler of his day. In 1818, so great was his -fame and that of Lambert, that they challenged Budd, Humewood, T. C. -Howard, and George Brown; but the four won in one innings, which so -provoked the Squire that he withdrew from the M.C.C.--another irritable -man. - -The celebrated William Lambert alone beat two accomplished cricketers, -Lord F. Beauclerk and Howard, by 15 runs. The Squire was too ill to -play, so Lambert played them both, and drew the stakes, 100_l._ Up to -1827, wides counted for nothing, and Lambert bowled wides on purpose to -Lord F. Beauclerk to put him out of temper. They were a choleric race -in those days. The fame of Lambert is tarnished for selling a match at -Nottingham, and he was warned off the ground at Lord’s for ever. - -Mr. Budd in 1820 played a fast bowler called Brand, the match ending -most disastrously for the latter. Mr. Budd went in first, got 70 runs, -knocked his wicket down on purpose, and bowled his opponent out for 0. -Budd then got 31, again knocked his wicket down, and again bowled his -rival out for nothing. Mr. Brand ended his days in a lunatic asylum; we -hope the malady was not brought on by this match, which was got up by -Mr. Ward, who backed Mr. Brand. - -The two brothers Broadbridge, one of whom was called ‘our Jem,’ beat -George Brown and Tom Marsden of Sheffield in 1827, but were beaten -in the return match. In 1832 Alfred Mynn played his first important -single-wicket match against Thomas Hills, Mynn winning with his wicket -standing. Hills said that Mynn bowled at least 50 wides, which seems -to prove that the chief bowlers of that day must have been slightly -deficient in accuracy. Why in this match the wides were not reckoned is -not clear, the rule scoring against the bowler having been put in force -some few years before. A return match was played, and Mynn again won, -this time in one innings, and Hills retired, satisfied, we suppose, -that in Mynn he had found his master. - -In 1833 Mynn and Pilch were perhaps the two greatest all-round players, -and Marsden of Sheffield in this year challenged the immortal Pilch, -who won in one innings and 70 runs. Pilch was not a great bowler, -neither was he fast, but Marsden’s style was fast underhand, and -Pilch’s bat was too straight for such bowling. In the return Pilch got -78 runs in the first innings and 100 in the second, and won the match -by 127 runs. The supremacy of Pilch over Marsden was fully asserted by -these two matches, and Marsden must have returned to Sheffield somewhat -crestfallen. - - Next Marsden may come, though it here must be stated - That his skill down at Sheffield is oft overrated. - -But the Yorkshiremen, we know, are always proud of their countrymen. -Pilch was a great batsman, and we do not feel surprised that he scored -so largely against fast underhand bowling. - -The ground ought to have been now cleared for a match between Mynn and -Pilch, and great would have been the interest if such a game had been -played--Voltigeur and The Flying Dutchman would have been nothing to -it. The two men belonged to the same county, so probably there was -wanting a sufficient motive; but together they would probably have -beaten any three other cricketers. - -Mr. Mynn next heavily defeated James Dearman of Sheffield twice, in -the first match by 112 runs, and again in one innings and 36 runs. Mynn -scored 46 in the last innings off 46 hits, which sounds strange, but -then, as is recorded naïvely in the ‘Scores and Biographies,’ Mynn was -always a great punisher. - -Mr. Felix next challenged Mr. Mynn, and he must have been of a sanguine -temperament to have done so; for, though perhaps a better bat than -Mynn, he was a left-handed lob bowler, a delivery not suited for -single-wicket matches. The first game Mynn won in one innings and 1 -run, only 9 runs being made in the whole match. In Felix’s second -innings Mynn bowled 247 balls for 3 runs. Single-wicket matches had -already begun to get out of favour; this was the most important that -had taken place for some time, and Squire Osbaldeston was a spectator. -In the return Mynn won by one wicket, and this was a small scoring -match. Mynn now was left unchallenged, having won all the single-wicket -matches in which he was engaged alone. In 1847 Wisden beat Sherman -twice. Thomas Hunt of Chesterfield was a great single-wicket -match-player, and beat Chatterton, Dakin, Charley Brown, and R. C. -Tinley. - -Single-wicket playing has been practically dead since 1850, though -Hayward, Carpenter, and Tarrant played two matches about the year 1862. -The subject possesses only an historical interest now, but in old times -it created enormous excitement, and no doubt the pride of the men of -Kent in Alfred Mynn was largely owing to his single-wicket prowess. If -such matches were played on the smooth wickets of modern times, the -fortunate man who won the toss might never be got out all day, and the -game would become a burlesque on cricket. Eleven fieldsmen, and not one -bowler merely, are now required to get out Mr. Grace and Shrewsbury, -and but few wickets are bowled down as compared with the days of fast -bowling and rough grounds. When the All England elevens used to tour -about the country under the management first of William Clarke and then -of George Parr, some of the best bowlers in England were to be found -in their ranks. Jackson, Willsher, Furley, Tarrant, and others used -often to play, and occasionally when the regular match was over, one of -them would earn a cheap sort of notoriety by challenging eleven of the -natives at single wicket. Eleven straight balls were sometimes found -sufficient to get the eleven out, and one run by the England player -gave him the victory. Such matches are absurd, and it is not a matter -of regret that they are played no longer. - -However, it seems right that a notice of the famous contests of old -should have been written, on account of the interest they formerly -excited, and on village greens, where eccentricities of ground are to -be met with, they may still perhaps be played. But they are a relic of -the past. - - - - -INDEX - - - Amateur, M. C. C. definition of an, 356 - - Australians, the, 74, 88, 188, 189, 207, 215, 258, 259, 273, 276, 285; - first matches with English teams in Australia, 313, 322; - first match in England, 314; - character of Gregory’s eleven, 314; - stimulating effect of rivalry on English cricket, 315; - doings, of Murdoch’s teams in 1880, 1882, and 1884, 315–318; - visit of Scott’s eleven in 1886, 318; - McDonnell’s 1888 team, 319; - Murdoch again captain in 1890, 320; - the eighth team (1893), 321; - Trott’s eleven (1896), 321; - Giffen, 322; - leading batting and bowling averages in test matches with England, - 324, 325; - Spofforth, 325; - reasons for excellence of their bowling, 326; - cup contests, 326 - - Authorities and literature cited:-- - Ancient Cities of the New World (De Charnay’s), 2; - A Pleasant Grove of New Fancies, 3; - Bell’s Life, 274; - Bentley’s Cricket Scores, 25; - Brand’s Popular Antiquities, 3, 4; - Byron, 10; - Chapman’s Odyssey, 2, 3; - Chesterfield, Lord, 9; - Clarke, Charles Cowden, 17; - Constitution Book of Guildford, 6, 7; - Contes du Roi Gambrinus, 6; - Cotgrave’s French and English Dictionary, 5, 6; - Cowper, 10; - Durfey’s Pills to purge Melancholy, 3; - English Game of Cricket (Box’s), 11; - Evans, Arthur, 1; - Florio’s Italian Dictionary, 6; - Gentleman’s Magazine, 11; - Gray, 9; - Grimston, Hon. Robert, 39, 364; - Herrick’s Hesperides, 3; - History of Guildford, 6; - Huddesford’s Salmagundi, 10; - Huddesford’s Wiccamical Chaplet, 10; - Jamieson’s Scotch Dictionary, 4; - Jerks in from Short-leg (Fitzgerald’s), 28, 263, 267; - Johnson, Dr., 3, 9; - Juvenile Sports, 27; - Knight, 22; - Life of the Scotch Rogue, 4; - Lillywhite’s Annual, 245; - Lillywhite’s Scores and Biographies, 28, 35, 358; - Lincoln, Bishop of, 26; - Longman’s Magazine, 153, 154; - Love’s Cricket, 12, 15; - Lyttelton, Hon. E., 245; - Mitford’s Our Village, 283; - Murray’s English Dictionary, 5; - Nyren’s Cricketer’s Guide, 12, 16, 19, 21, 25, 388; - Pinder, George, 252; - Piozzi, Mrs., 1; - Pope, 9, 31; - Proctor, R. A., 153; - Prowse, 297; - Punch, 31; - Pycroft’s Cricket Field, 12, 23, 25, 43, 155, 156, 359; - Rambler, 5; - St. Andrews, Bishop of, 12, 23, 26, 329; - Scott, Sir Walter, 294; - Skeat’s Etymological Dictionary, 5; - Sketches of the Players (Denison’s), 21; - the Sporting Magazine, 21; - Strutt’s Sports and Pastimes, 3–5; - Teonge, Henry, 8; - Todd’s Johnson, 5; - Tom and Jerry, 281; - Walker, John, 277; - Walpole, Horace, 9; - Ward, Rev. Arthur, 313; - Zola’s Germinal, 6 - - - Balls, 195 - - Barre, tennis-player, 246 - - Base-ball, 2, 3, 153 - - Bats, 36, 41, 42 - - Batsmen, past and present, amateur and professional:-- - Abel, 69, 74, 100, 215, 321 - Absalom, C. A., 91 - Aislabie, 28 - Almond, H. H., 32 - Anderson, 370 - Ash, E. P., 40 - Aylward, 16, 24, 389 - Bagge, T. E., 370 - Baldwin, 100 - Balfour, Leslie, 32 - Bannerman, A. C., 145, 316, 317, 321 - Bannerman, C., 170, 313, 315 - Barlow, R. G., 90 - Barnes, 68, 358 - Bates, 358, 373 - Beagley, 36, 359, 360 - Beauclerk, Lord F., 20, 23, 24, 36, 359, 360, 389, 390 - Beldham, William, 20, 23–25, 35, 36, 389 - Bennett, 389 - Bentley, 36 - Bligh, Hon. Ivo, 32, 170, 241, 273 - Board, 38 - Bonnor, G. J., 74, 77, 86, 148, 207, 316, 317 - Briggs, 88, 357, 358 - Broadbridge, James, 36, 390 - Brockwell, 321 - Brown, Charley, 392 - Brown, G., 390 - Bruce, W., 179, 318, 321 - Bryan, 15 - Buchanan, 356 - Budd, 20, 36, 359, 360, 390 - Buller, C. F., 37, 49, 212 - Burbidge, 37 - Burgoyne, 68 - Burn, 320 - Cæsar, Julius, 37 - Caffyn, 37, 365 - Carpenter, 37, 39, 40, 54, 64, 366, 369, 370, 392 - Chalmers, 32 - Champain, 38 - Charlton, 320 - Chatterton, 392 - Cheyne, Arthur, 32 - Cobham, Lord, 64, 355 - Cooper, 37 - Daft, Richard, 37, 38, 39, 40, 67, 100, 358, 369, 370 - Dakin, 392 - Dalkeith, Lord, 295 - Darling, 179, 322, 323 - Dearman, James, 391 - Dickens, Major, 32 - Donnan, 69, 322 - Douglas, John, 295 - Drake, 369 - Druce, 323 - Emmett, 310 - Evans, A. H., 240 - Evans, E., 318 - Felix, 36, 37, 359, 362, 392 - Fennex, William, 25, 36, 389 - Flowers, 373 - Ford, F. G. J., 53, 56, 73, 86, 179 - Forman, William, 297 - Freemantle, 21 - Fryer, F. E. R., 43 - Fuller Pilch, 17, 25, 26, 36, 43, 49, 79, 156, 363, 365, 386, 391 - Giffen, G., 74, 148, 207, 316, 317, 321, 322, 324 - Golden, 389 - Grace, E. M., 51, 278 - Grace, G. F., 301, 373 - Grace, W. G., 36, 37, 38, 40, 43, 44, 52, 54, 56, 58, 64–66, 73, 81, - 85, 86, 90, 97, 98, 117, 130, 148, 164, 183, 196, 212, 213, 214, - 216, 254, 262, 263, 267, 278, 313–315, 321, 324, 344, 363, 369, - 371–374, 376, 392 - Graham, 321 - Green, C. E., 309 - Greenwood, Luke, 310 - Gregory, 314, 315, 320–323 - Grey, Jack, 297 - Griffith, 37 - Grundy, 67, 365, 372 - Gunn, 60, 62, 63, 93, 100, 188, 213, 215, 286, 321, 358 - Guy, Joseph, 37, 365 - Hall, Louis, 83, 101, 145, 343 - Hankey, 37, 38, 359, 366, 369 - Harris, Lord, 212, 306 - Hay Brown, 32 - Haygarth, 369 - Hayward, 26, 37, 38, 40, 215, 227, 323, 366, 370, 392 - Hearne, George, 100 - Hearne, Tom, 37, 67 - Henderson, E., 32 - Hewett, H. T., 179 - Hill, Clement, 179, 322–324 - Hills, Thomas, 391 - Hooker, W., 36 - Horan, 170, 315–317 - Hornby, A. N., 43, 183, 314 - Howard, T. C., 390 - Humewood, 390 - Humphrey, Richard, 290 - Humphrey, Tom, 26, 37, 40 - Hunt, Thomas, 392 - Iddison, Roger, 263, 310 - Iredale, F. A., 322, 323, 324 - Jackson, F. S., 40, 85, 214, 215, 321, 354 - Jessop, 38, 74, 86 - Jones, George, 74 - Jones, T. B., 275 - Jones, S. P., 316 - Jupp, 26 - Kempson, 359, 366 - Key, K. J., 61, 64, 254, 263 - King, R. T., 275, 277, 278 - Lambert, W., 25, 36, 389, 390 - Lane, 369 - Lane, C. G., 37 - Law, W., 274, 275 - Lear, George, 17 - Leslie, C. F. H., 239, 240 - Lillywhite, James, 313 - Lillywhite, W., 365 - Lockwood, 213, 357 - Lockyer, Tom, 370 - Long, R. P., 364 - Lubbock, 37 - Lucas, A. P., 66, 196, 373 - Lucas, F. M., 179 - Lyons, 77, 86, 321 - Lyttelton, Hon. A., 92, 373 - Lyttelton, Hon. C. G. (now Lord), 37, 40, 64, 371 - Lyttelton, Hon. E., 189 - McDonnell, P. S., 74, 148, 207, 262, 263, 317–319, 322 - McIlwraith, J., 318 - Mackenzie, Jack, 32 - McLaren, 85, 215, 323, 324, 363 - Maitland, 37 - Makinson, 370, 371 - Marsden, 37, 391 - Marshall, R. T., 295 - Marshall, Tom, 32 - Massie, H. H., 74, 148, 316, 317 - Maul, H. C., 56 - Mitchell, R. A. H., 37, 40, 62, 64, 370, 371 - Mortlock, 37, 268 - Moses, 179 - Moule, W. H., 316 - Murdoch, W. L., 158, 170, 189, 315–320, 324 - Mynn, A., 37, 361, 362, 363, 391, 392 - Newland, 15 - Nichols, 100 - Norman, F. H., 37 - O’Brien, 61, 86 - Osbaldeston, 36, 390, 392 - Painter, 101 - Palairet, L. C. H., 72, 85 - Palmer, G. E., 316 - Parr, George, 37, 40, 62, 63, 65, 66, 227, 256, 313, 362, 363, - 365–371, 392 - Patterson, 66, 373 - Pauncefote, B., 56 - Peel, 88, 179, 213 - Penn, Frank, 46 - Philipson, 321 - Pilling, 212 - Pinder, George, 277, 310 - Quaife, W., 100 - Quaife, W. G., 100 - Ranjitsinhji, K. S., 47, 85, 215, 323, 324 - Read, W. W., 40, 117, 213, 214, 318 - Ridley, A. W., 212 - Robinson, Tom, 389 - Rotherham, 373 - Rumney, 15 - Saunders, 36 - Scott, H. J. H., 163, 317, 318 - Scott, Hon. J. M., 32, 296, 298 - Scott, Lord George, 32, 296 - Scotton, W., 179, 358 - Searle, 36 - Selby, 358 - Sherman, 390, 392 - Shrewsbury, Arthur, 54, 56, 60, 73, 76, 77, 78, 83, 100, 188, 196, - 212, 213, 324, 343, 358, 373, 376, 392 - Small, John, 17 - Smart, Charles, 281 - Smith, 15 - Steel, A. G., 32, 56, 73, 76, 78, 86, 324, 376 - Steel, D. Q., 66 - Stephenson, 37, 313, 370, 371 - Stoddart, A. E., 40, 53, 196, 213, 215, 321–325, 327, 376 - Storer, 321, 333 - Sueter, Tom, 17, 24 - Sugg, 100 - Tarrant, 392 - Taylor, C. G., 37, 362–364 - Thornton, C. I., 77 - Tinley, R. C., 392 - Townsend, 38 - Trott, 189, 322, 323 - Trumble, J. W., 318 - Tufton, Hon. H., 359 - Tufton, Hon. T., 359 - Tunnicliffe, 100 - Ulyett, G., 148 - Wakley, Billy, 281 - Walker, J., 277, 370 - Walker, T., 20, 21, 24, 47, 389 - Walker, V. E., 37 - Walters, 320 - Ward, A., 100, 215 - Ward, W., 16, 23, 26, 31, 36, 390 - Watson, Charles, 281 - Webbe, A. J., 43, 314, 387 - Wenman, E. G., 37 - Wisden, 392 - Wootton, 101, 310, 372 - Wyer, Michael Russell, 296 - Yardley, W., 43, 56 - (_See also under_ University Cricketers) - - Batting, art of, 34; - shape of bat, 35, 36; - choice of bat, 41; - rules for the guidance of batsmen, 41; - position at wicket, 42–46; - Fuller Pilch as a model batsman, 36, 43; - W. G. Grace’s attitude, 44; - manner of holding the bat, 45; - playing fast bowling, 46; - position of right foot, 46, 54, 65, 302; - pulling a straight fast ball to leg, 47; - correct pose of left shoulder and elbow, 48, 54, 71; - what to do when the ball is well outside off stump, 48; - forward play, 48; - how to meet shooters, 50; - tactics when playing and unable to smother the ball at the pitch, - 51; - half-cock stroke, 51; - back play, 39, 53; - dealing with a very short ball, 54; - easy wickets, 56; - the hanging ball, 57; - the yorker, 57, 129, 130; - offensive tactics, 58; - the cut, 40, 42, 59; - weak-wristed players’ cutting, 61; - the leg-hit, 62; - hit to square-leg, 39, - pushing, 64; - the glide, 65; - playing a ball on the legs that is not short enough to play back to, - 66; - the ‘draw,’ 67; - snicking a ball off leg-stump, 67; - forcing stroke off the legs, 68; - off-drive to coverpoint and right hand of point, 68; - off balls, 69; - half-volley on off side, 71; - the hard drive, 72; - half-volley on on side, 72; - play to fast bowling on soft tricky wickets, 73; - hitting on difficult wickets, 74; - play to slow bowling, 75; - running out to drive, 76; - dealing with balls that are well outside the off stump, 78; - playing lobs, 78; - the pat, 79; - how to meet fast or medium-pace balls on soft wickets, 81; - running, 83; - imitation of great players, 85; - temperament, 86; - nervousness, 87; - rules of health, 88; - sleep, 88; - over-eating, 88; - superstitions of players, 89; - number of ways of getting out, 89, 91; - hitting twice, 90; - picking up the ball while in ‘play,’ 90; - obstructing the field, 90; - rule for playing off breaks of all paces, 117; - timidity with balls on off side, 132; - pokey batsman dealing with high-dropping full-pitch ball, 139; - when wicket softened by overnight rainfall, 142; - mistakes made about the state of the wicket, 146; - dealing with left-handed bowlers, 149; - left-handed batsmen, 178; - W. G. Grace’s counsel on how to score, 299–312. - (_See also under_ Bowling) - - Betting, 102 - - Border cricket, 292; - character of wicket, 292; - trop de zèle, 294; - patriotic partiality of umpires, 293; - playing for victory rather than cricket, 294; - surroundings of grounds,294; - batting and bowling, 295; - ‘Les Enfants Perdus,’ 295; - ‘Eccentric Flamingoes,’ 295; - T. R. Marshall, 295; - pleasant reminiscences, 296; - at the present day, 297; - umpiring, 298 - - Border Cup, 298 - - Bowlers, past and present, amateur and professional:-- - Absolom, 285 - Allan, 152, 153, 314, 325 - Appleby, 97, 178 - Atkinson, 277 - Attewell, 48, 88, 149, 212, 215 - Barclay, 23, 24, 32 - Barker, Tom, 37 - Barnes, 358, 373, 386 - Barrett, 320 - Bates, 207, 258 - Bathurst, Sir F., 37, 362, 364, 366, 373 - Bean, 357 - Beauclerk, Lord F., 23, 24, 359, 389 - Beldham, 359, 390 - Bennett, George, 39, 76 - Bland, 122 - Bonnor, 172 - Bowley, 160 - Box, Tom, 276 - Boyle, Cecil, 23 - Boyle, H. F., 258, 314, 315, 316, 317, 325 - Brand, 390 - Brett, Thomas, 17, 23, 24 - Briggs, 73, 75, 88, 100, 147, 149, 151, 152, 169, 211, 215, 321, - 325, 357, 358 - Broadbridge, James, 21, 22, 35, 365 - Brown, 357 - Brown, George, 365 - Browne, 23 - Bruce, W., 321 - Buchanan, David, 38, 97, 132, 151 - Budd, E. H., 26, 35 - Bull, 97, 215 - Bunch, 181 - Butler, 161 - Caffyn, W., 357 - Carpenter, 26, 227 - Christopherson, S., 160 - Clarke, William, 23, 37, 75, 79, 154–157, 362, 363, 365, 366, 392 - Cobbett, 37, 360, 361 - Cooper, W. H., 108 - Crossland, 160 - Cunliffe, 76, 97, 161 - Cuttell, 122, 161 - Davidson, 88, 122, 161 - Dean, 366 - Dryden, Billy, 297 - Emmett, Tom, 88, 101, 134, 166, 168, 178, 275, 277, 309, 318 - Evans, 74, 135, 161, 325, 373 - Felix, 365 - Fellows, Harvey, 24, 364, 366 - Ferris, J. J., 319, 320, 325 - Flowers, 212, 373 - Forbes, 172 - Ford, A. F. J., 239 - Francis, 161 - Freeman, 24, 39, 161, 277, 309, 310 - Fuller Pilch, 361, 365, 391 - Furley, 392 - Game, 172, 275 - Garrett, T. W., 74, 277, 314–317, 325 - Giffen, G., 73, 167, 168, 316, 317, 321, 322, 325 - Glassford, Clement, 32, 297 - Grace, W. G., 97, 153, 168, 169, 213 - Grant, Hope, 24 - Greenwood, Luke, 372 - Hall, Harry, 25 - Hammond, 359 - Harris, D., 19–21, 24, 358, 389 - Harrison, 160 - Hartley, 59 - Hearne, A., 59, 116, 122, 212, 215 - Hearne, J. T., 161, 325 - Hide, J., 357 - Hill, Allan, 160, 277, 358 - Hillyer, 37, 75, 362, 365 - Hirst, 88, 122, 215 - Hodgson, 31 - Hodswell, 16 - Horan, 315, 316 - Howard, T. C., 360 - Howell, 323, 325 - Humphreys, 154, 156, 321 - Jackson, 24, 31, 39, 54, 76, 97, 161, 369, 370, 392 - Jephson, 154 - Jessop, 38, 59, 74, 76, 97, 161 - Jones, 59, 174, 322, 323, 325 - Kempson, 366, 373 - Kendall, Tom, 152 - Knight, G., 21, 22 - Kortright, 76, 97, 161 - Lambert, 17, 18, 23, 359 - Lang, R., 24, 268, 274 - Leslie, C. F. H., 170 - Lillywhite, James, 81, 313 - Lillywhite, John, 301, 369 - Lillywhite, W., 17, 21, 22, 35, 37, 43, 75, 276, 360–365 - Lockwood, 116, 211, 212, 213, 321, 357, 358 - Lohmann, 174, 212, 325, 386 - Lumpy (Stevens), 12, 18, 24, 388 - Lyttelton, Hon. A., 318 - Mann, Noah, 18, 358 - Marcon, 24 - Marsden T., 390, 391 - Marsham, C. D., 369, 370 - Martingell, 63, 112, 366 - Mathews, 360 - McDonnell, P. S., 316 - McIntyre, Martin, 81 - McKibbin, 174, 322 - McLeod, R., 321, 323 - Midwinter, 315, 317 - Miles, Farmer, 280 - Minshull, 388 - Mold, 116, 122, 161, 164, 211, 212, 213 - Morley, Fred., 81, 82, 166, 174, 205, 262, 314, 358, 373 - Morton, 161 - Mynn, Alfred, 22–24, 26, 37, 75, 275, 276, 360, 361, 362, 364, 365, - 366, 386, 391 - Noble, 323, 325 - Nyren, Richard, 17 - Osbaldeston, 23, 390 - Palmer, 74, 105, 121, 151, 164, 168, 174, 258, 276, 277, 317, 325 - Payne, 369 - Peate, 38, 81, 100, 147, 151, 168, 276, 318, 373 - Peel, 75, 88, 149, 151, 211, 213, 215, 325 - Powys, 24, 161, 268 - Rawlin, 88 - Redgate, 37, 75, 275, 361 - Richardson, 39, 76, 81, 116, 122, 161, 174, 215, 325 - Ridley, A. W., 154, 156, 212, 270, 274, 275, 314 - Rotherham, A., 160, 164, 373 - Rotherham, H., 160 - Saunders, 21 - Searle, 21 - Shaw, Alfred, 38, 76, 81, 82, 100, 115, 121, 131, 147, 205, 212, - 289, 309, 314, 364, 372 - Shaw, J. C., 152, 289, 301, 358 - Shrewsbury, 271 - Silcock, 112 - Sinclair, 32 - Slinn, 31 - Smith, 373 - Southerton, 81, 115, 276 - Spofforth, 23, 98, 120, 121, 133, 134, 148, 149, 162, 164, 167, 172, - 174, 185, 189, 241, 258, 268, 277, 310, 314–317, 324, 325, 374 - Steel, 373 - Stephenson, 369 - Stratford, 108 - Streatfeild, 97 - Studd, 97 - Tarrant, 24, 54, 161, 370, 371, 392 - Taylor, 366 - Thewlis, 358 - Thornton, C. I., 181 - Tinley, 31, 156 - Toppin, C., 160 - Trott, 59, 189, 321, 323 - Trumble, H., 320–323, 325 - Turner, C. T. B., 120, 149, 174, 319, 320–322, 325, 326 - Tylecote, 170 - Tyler, 38, 75, 147, 276 - Ulyett, 160, 277, 373 - Vigne, 360 - Wainwright, 59, 88, 147, 212, 213, 215 - Walker, T., 19, 22, 24, 35, 359 - Walker, V. E., 156 - Ward, A., 215 - Watson, 100, 373 - Wells, C. M., 97, 212 - Wenman, 361, 365, 366 - Wheeler, 357 - Whitby, 160 - Willes, 19, 21, 22, 96 - Willsher, 23, 369–371, 392 - Wilson, 97 - Wisden, 365, 369 - Wood, J. B., 156 - Woods, S. M. J., 76, 97, 161, 164, 373 - Wootton, 309 - Wright, W., 100, 101, 178, 357 - Yonge, George, 364 - (_See also under_ University Cricketers) - - Bowling, art of, 94; - present contrasted with past, 95; - falling off in amateur, 97; - at the public schools, 97, 98; - the professional bowler, 98–102, 357; - object of the bowler, 102; - the four motions of the ball and their intention, 103; - the spin from right to left, or leg-break, 104–113; - placing fieldsmen for leg-break balls, 107; - rotary motion of ball from left to right, or off break, 113; - what becomes of likely balls if not well played, 114; - break-back, 115, 117, 138; - fast off break, 116; - playing off breaks, 117; - upward vertical spin, 118; - downward vertical spin, 118; - combinations of spin, 119; - change of pace, 119–121; - high delivery,122; - advantages of slow delivery, 122–127; - two exceptions to putting on slows, 124; - yorkers, 128, 164; - leg half-volleys, 131; - good-length ball outside off stump, 131; - bowling player off his legs, 133; - from different distances, 134; - choice of ends, by the slow bowler, 135; - taking advantage of peculiarities of time and ground, 136; - avoidance of singularity of dress or manner, 137; - changing from over to round the wicket, 137; - varieties of full-pitch, 138; - high-dropping full-pitch, 138; - ordinary slow full-pitch, 140; - medium-paced full-pitch, 140; - how to turn different states of the ground to advantage, 142; - long-hops, 145, 146; - sodden wickets, 145; - the ‘cutting through’ state, 147; - the drying state, 147; - hard and crumbled wicket, 149; - left-handed bowlers, 149–153; - balls curling or twisting in the air, 153, 154; - under-hand slows, 154; - lobs, 156, 209; - fast bowling, 158–167; - the off break, 162; - long run up to wicket before delivery, 162; - practising before beginning, 163; - straight delivery, 163; - value of long stops, 164; - leg-stump bowling, 165; - bowling over and round the wicket, 165; - getting leg bias on a ball, 166; - attitude in delivery, 166–168; - ‘every cricketer should bowl,’ 170; - throwing, 171–175; - position of field for fast bowling, 175, 178; - dealing with left-handed bats, 178; - shooters, 180; - fast under-arm bowling, 181; - sneaks, 181; - rules for bowlers in the field, 182–186; - obedience to captain, 182; - quick return of bowler to wicket, 183; - appeals to umpires, 184; - shoes, 184; - cutting up the wicket, 184; - rules for beginners, 185; - training young cricketers, 382. - (_See also under_ Batting) - - Buccleuch, Duke of, 292, 297 - - Bunyan, John, playing at cat, 4 - - - Captains, 191; - few good, and those amateurs, 187, 188; - difficulties of professional, 188; - captaincy of the Australians, 189; - qualifications for, 189; - nervous order, 190; - apathetic kind, 190; - bowling enthusiasts, 190; - duties of, 191; - choice of team, 191, 207; - putting the other side in first, 191; - order of sending men in, 195–197; - counsel and encouragement to players, 198; - right of captains to order men to get out or to bowl wides to cause - or prevent a follow on, 198–203; - economising time, 203; - educational hints to men, 203; - correcting slovenly dress, 204; - duties in field, 204; - management of the bowling, 204; - placing field, 206; - duties of captains of University and Public Schools teams, 207; - management of school elevens, 209; - enforcing practice, 210; - what to drink, 210; - selection of teams, 211–216; - cheerfulness and watchfulness, 216 - - Cat-and-dog, 4, 5 - - Clubs:-- - All England Eleven, 363; - Drumpellier, 32; - Eccentric Flamingoes, 295; - Free Foresters, 31; - Hambledon, 10, 19, 21, 31, 358, 388; - I. Z., 31; - Melbourne, 313; - Old Grange, 32; - Richmond, 12; - Vine (Sevenoaks), 11; - West of Scotland, 32; - White Conduit, 27 - - Country cricket, 280; - a rustic match in 1830, 280; - dress of period, 280; - paraphernalia of the time, 281; - a common warlike wind-up of the match, 282; - modern village cricket, 282; - training of village lads, 283; - single wicket, 284; - practice before a match, 284; - sixpence on the wicket, 285; - the thing to ‘burn’ into a young player’s mind, 285; - getting and saving runs, 285; - management and finance, 286; - subscriptions, 286; - professional trainers, 284, 286; - playing against strong in preference to weak teams, 287; - educating the rougher element, 287; - introduction of the school element, 288; - a captain’s reward, 288; - début of Richard Humphrey, 289; - expenses, 290; - country umpires, 290 - - Cricket, history of, 1; - archæology of the game, 1; - Strutt on stool-ball, 3; - cat-and-dog, 4; - derivation of the word ‘cricket,’ 5; - ‘Miss Wicket,’ 7, 11; - in Queen Elizabeth’s time, 7, 8; - costume of cricketers in 1791, 10; - the ball in 1770, 11; - curved bats, 11, 24; - earliest laws, 12; - Mr. Love’s poetical effusion, 15; - a ghost at a cricket match, 15, _note_; - Hambledon the centre of cricket, 17; - Nyren’s Cricketer’s Guide, 16, _et seq._; - Lumpy and Noah Mann, 18; - David Harris, 19; - William Lillywhite, 21, 22; - Beldham, 25; - rise of the Marylebone C.C., 27; - M.C.C. laws, 28; - origin of Lord’s, 27, 28; - epochs in the history of the game, 31; - Scotch cricket, 32; - the whole art of batting, 34–93; - Fuller Pilch, 36, 43; - W. G. Grace as a batsman, 37, 44, _et seq._; - C. G. Lyttelton, Humphrey, and Ash, 40; - Robert Carpenter, 54; - superstitions among cricketers, 89; - scientific bowling, 94–186; - Willes’ introduction of round-arm bowling, 96; - concerning professionals, 98–102; - danger of game drifting into a mere monetary speculation, 102; - Spofforth, 120, 133, 324, 325, 374; - A. Shaw, 121; Tom Emmett, 134; - Peate, 151; - David Buchanan, 151; - Briggs, 151; - Mr. R. A. Proctor on bowling, 153; - W. G. Grace as a bowler, 169; - anecdote respecting W. G. Grace and Briggs, 169; - bowling in Australia, 174; - the genius who had discovered how to bowl shooters, 181; - captains and their functions, 187–216; - ‘Pavilion’ criticism, 198; - M.C.C. legislation as to following on and declaring innings at an - end, 202; - Morley’s geographical attainments, 205; - selecting representative elevens, 211–216; - umpires and their duties, 217–244; - a primitive match in Hampshire, 228; - the umpire who ‘dussn’t give him out,’ 231; - the art of fielding, 245–279; - country cricket, 280–291; - description of a rustic match in 1830, 280–282; - reminiscences of Border cricket, 292–298; - W. G. Grace on ‘How to score,’ 299–312; - the Australians and their doings, 313–327; - matches of English with Australian teams, 313–325; - reason alleged for excellence of Australian bowling, 325; - anecdote of a famous fieldsman, 327; - the University cricket match, 328–355; - Bishop Wordsworth’s account of the first Inter-University match, - 330–333; - the famous two-run success of Cambridge University in 1870, 339; - the celebrated six-run victory of Oxford in 1875, 346; - the University bowlers, 352; - encounters of the Gentleman and Players, 356–374; - Alfred Mynn, 361; - training young cricketers, 375–385; - single wicket, 386–393 - - Cricket-grounds, Australian, 326 - - - Dex, 1 - - Dorset, Duke of, 388, 389 - - Dress, 204, 387 - - Drink, 210 - - - Fielding, 245; - a safe field, 246; - directions for, 246; - backing up, 247; - throwing, 248; - deep field, or country catching, 250; - wicket-keeping, 251; - long-leg, 256; - mid-off and mid-on, 257; - cover-point, 259; - point, 260–262; - short-slip, 263; - third man, 265; - short-leg, 266; - long-stop, 267–270; - bad, indifferent, and specious fielding, 271; - famous fielders, 272–276; - celebrated wicket-keepers, 276; - young cricketers, 384 - - Fieldsmen:-- - Andrews, 278 - Barlow, 170 - Bell, F., 278 - Bickley, John, 278 - Boyle, H. F., 206, 258 - Briggs, 278, 325 - Burnup, 247 - Bury, W., 274, 278 - Carpenter, 227, 260, 278 - Dench, 365 - Diver, A., 268, 278 - Douglas, J., 246 - Game, 275 - Giffen, G., 325 - Grace, Dr. E. M., 278 - Grace, W. G., 262, 263, 278 - Gregory, 278 - Gunn, 213, 278, 285 - Hartopp, E. S. E., 278 - Hildyard, 278 - Jones, T. B., 275 - King, R. T., 275, 277, 278 - Lang, R., 274, 278 - Law, W., 260, 274, 275 - Lubbock, A., 278 - Lyttelton, Hon. C. G., 274 - Mansfield, Hon. J. W., 278 - Marshall, H. M., 268, 274, 278 - Moorhouse, 278 - Mordaunt, G. J., 260 - Mortlock, W., 278 - Palairet, 246 - Pickering, W., 275, 278 - Pilch, W., 278 - Read, W. W., 207 - Ridley, 274, 275 - Royle, 275, 278, 326 - Shaw, J. C., 267 - Shrewsbury, 212, 213 - Smith, John, 62, 278 - Studd, G. B., 258, 278 - Sugg, 246 - Taylor, Josiah, 281 - Thewlis, J., 278 - Tinley, R. C., 278 - Tobin, F., 268 - Wainwright, 247, 278 - Walker, J., 277 - Walker, V. E., 278 - Wright, F. W., 278 - - - Gentlemen and Players, 356; - definition of amateur and professional, 356; - Mr. W. G. Grace’s share in the matches, 371, 372, 373; - supremacy of professionals as bowlers, 357; - congestion of professional skill in certain districts, 358; - amateurs, 358; - the first match, 359; - details of matches played, 360–373; - Alfred Mynn, 361; - the Barn Door Match or Ward’s Folly, 361; - William Lillywhite, 362, 364; - William Clarke, 362; - the year 1846, 363; - C. G. Taylor, 363; - Fuller Pilch, 365; - victories of the Players from 1853 to 1865, 366; - in 1857, 369; - victories of the Gentlemen, 1866–1879, 372; - a tie, 373; - the future, 374 - - Gregory’s Australian team, 314 - - Grounds:-- - Bramall Lane, Sheffield, 271; - Brunswick, Hove, Brighton, 301; - Bullingdon Green, 328; - Clifton College, 308; - Cowley Marsh, 328; - Fenner’s, 339; - Lascelles Hall, 357; - Lord’s, 24, 27, 28, 38, 53, 66, 75, 90, 92, 147, 168, 188, 189, 193, - 208, 218, 227, 235, 273, 274, 290, 295, 309, 314, 318–320, - 328–330, 359, 369–373; - Magdalen, Oxford, 328; - Oval, 28, 64, 74, 188, 218, 227, 235, 262, 273, 318–320, 329, - 369–373 - - - Hambledon, the home of cricket, 17 - - Hawick, cricket at, 292, 295 - - Health, 88 - - Hockey, 2 - - - Kent, cricketing in, in 1830, 280 - - - ‘Laws of Cricket’ revised at the ‘Star and Garter’ by a committee of - noblemen and gentlemen, &c., 218 - - Lord, Thomas, founder of Lord’s cricket-ground, 27 - - - McDonnell’s Australian team, 319 - - Mann, Sir Horace, 389 - - Marylebone Cricket Club, the parliament of cricket, 27; - presidents and secretaries, 28; - abolition of rule forbidding ground to be rolled except before each - innings, 142; - on throwing, 172, 174; - on follow-on and declaring innings at end, 202; - on definition of amateur, 356 - - Matches:-- - Australians _v._ Cambridge University, 314, 315, 316; - _v._ Derbyshire, 315; - _v._ England, 169, 194, 262, 271, 315–322; - _v._ Gentlemen of England, 168, 314, 315, 316; - _v._ Gloucestershire, 314, 315; - _v._ Lancashire, 316; - _v._ Leicestershire, 314; - _v._ M.C.C., 314; - _v._ Middlesex, 314; - _v._ Nottingham, 314, 315, 316; - _v._ Oxford University, 316; - _v._ Players, 315, 316; - _v._ Surrey, 314; - _v._ Sussex, 314; - _v._ Yorkshire, 74, 314–317. - Cambridge _v._ Oxford, 135, 194, 275, 328–353; - Eton _v._ Harrow, 332; - Gentlemen _v._ Players, 38, 40, 87, 188, 273, 301, 329, 356–374. - Gloucestershire _v._ Kent, 308; - _v._ Notts, 306; - _v._ Surrey, 86, 307; - _v._ Yorkshire, 306. - Hambledon _v._ England, 388, 389; - Hampshire _v._ England, 389; - Kent _v._ All England, 15; - _v._ Hambledon, 388, 389; - _v._ Hants, 389; - _v._ Sussex, 76. - M.C.C. _v._ Cambridge University, 86, 92; - _v._ Hertfordshire, 28; - _v._ Kent, 306; - _v._ Oxford University, 87; - _v._ Yorkshire, 309. - North _v._ South, 38, 90. - Notts _v._ Yorkshire, 63. - Surrey _v._ Cambridge University, 91; - _v._ England, 389; - _v._ Kent, 43; - _v._ Notts, 289 - - Maxwell, Mr., 298 - - Murdoch’s teams of Australian cricketers, 315–318, 320 - - - Nervousness, 87 - - Nottinghamshire bowlers, 357 - - - Pallamajo, 1 - - Professionals as a class, 98, 101, 102; - prospects of, in their career, 99–101; - definition of, 356 - - Public schools and colleges, bowling at the, 95, 97, 98; - captains, 207, 209; - elevens, 209; - Charterhouse, 330, 354; - Cheltenham, 354; - Clifton, 354; - Eton, 9, 330, 332, 339, 353; - Harrow, 330, 353; - Marlborough, 354; - Repton, 354; - Rugby, 151, 330, 353; - Shrewsbury, 10; - Tonbridge, 354; - Uppingham, 164, 354; - Westminster, 354; - Winchester, 330, 354; - Wykeham, 330, 331 - - - Regimen, 210 - - Rounders, 1, 2 - - Rustic match, a, in 1830, 280 - - - Scores, how to make good, 299; - diet, sleep, and exercise, 299; - early training, 300; - practice on ground previous to match, 300; - testing pads, gloves, and shoes, 301; - punctuality at wicket, 302; - taking guard, 302; - observation of position of field, 302; - beginning of innings, 303; - avoidance of sharp runs, 303; - running out big hits, 304; - playing balls too quickly, 304; - dealing with thirst, 304; - modesty in the hour of victory, 305; - differing orders of wickets, 305; - a fast, dry, and true wicket, 305; - a fast, good, wet wicket, 307; - a slow, good, dry wicket, 307; - a bumpy wicket, 308; - a drying, sticky wicket, 310; - dealing with straight balls, 310; - valuable hints, 310, 311; - playing against odds, 311 - - Scotch cricket, 32, 194, 230 - - Scott’s Australian eleven, 318 - - Shoes, 184, 241 - - Single wicket, 284, 386; - rules, 387; - annals, 388–392 - - Sleep, 88 - - Smoking, 210 - - Snob-cricket, 1 - - Spikes, 184 - - Stoddart’s English team in Australia, 215, 322–323 - - Stool-ball, 1–4 - - Stump-cricket, 1 - - Superstition among players, 89 - - Sutton-in-Ashfield, the nursery of bowlers, 358 - - - Temperament, 86 - - Throwing, 171 - - Training young cricketers, art of, 375; - beginning early, 375; - evils of over-coaching, 376, 380; - learning to bat, 377–382; - duties of the coach, 380; - teaching to bowl, 382–384; - fielding, 384 - - Trott’s Australian team, 321, 322 - - - Umpires, 217; - none in early days of cricket, 217; - scoring by the ‘notcher,’ 217; - rules for, in the ‘Laws of Cricket,’ 218; - former custom of each side providing its own, 218; - present mode of nominating, 219; - source from whence drawn, 219; - difficulties of, 219; - deciding on question of bat or hand touching ball, 219; - finality of decisions, 221; - in cases of l.b.w., 223; - mutinous bowlers, 225; - club cricket disputes, 226; - at rustic matches, 226–231; - folly of giving reasons for decisions, 231; - qualifications for, 232; - quickness in deciding, 233; - powers of concentration, 233; - duties of, 234; - ground-measuring and placing of stumps, 234; - settlement of boundaries, 235; - punctuality, 235; - position at wicket, 235; - crying ‘no ball,’ 236; - wide ball, 237; - precedence of appeal to, at bowler’s end, 238; - bump balls, 239; - stumping, 240; - fair and unfair play, 241; - at striker’s end, 241; - use of common sense, 244; - country specimens, 290; - in Border cricket, 298 - - Umpires:-- - Barker, Tom, 290; - Bayley, J., 290; - Caldecourt, 290; - Good, 290; - Ost, 281 - - Universities, bowling at the, 95, 97; - captains, 207, 209, 210; - teams, 274 - - University cricketers (_see also under_ Batsmen _and_ Bowlers): - Absalom, 344 - Anson, T. A., 334 - Ash, E. P., 40 - Baily, 339 - Balfour, R. D., 334 - Bardswell, 334 - Barnard, 330, 332 - Bayley, 331 - Belcher, 340, 343–345 - Berkeley, 334, 338, 355 - Blacker, 347, 349 - Blore, E. W., 336 - Booth, 352 - Bourne, 340, 342, 343, 345 - Briggs, 346, 348 - Buckland, 347, 348 - Bullock, 335 - Butler, S. E., 334, 337, 340, 342, 343, 345, 355 - Campbell, 347 - Case, 354 - Cobden, 337, 340, 342–346 - Cunliffe, 334 - Curteis, 352 - Dale, 340, 341, 346 - Druce, F. N., 354 - Evans, A. H., 334, 354 - Fawcett, E. B., 337 - Fellowes, E. L., 334 - Fellowes, W., 335 - Fiennes, W., 335 - Fortescue, 341, 346 - Fowler, 352 - Francis, 340, 342, 346, 354 - Freeman, George, 351 - Fryer, 337, 342 - Game, 346, 348, 351 - Green, C. E., 335 - Greenfield, 349 - Hamilton, 349 - Hill, F. H., 342–345 - Inge, 354 - Jackson, F. S., 334, 354 - Jardine, 335 - Jenner, Herbert, 331 - Kelcey, 347, 348 - Kempson, 355 - Kenney, E. M., 334, 336, 354, 355 - Key, 335, 336, 354, 355 - King, R. T., 335 - Lane, C. G., 339, 355 - Lang, R., 334, 335, 337, 346, 347, 349, 350, 351, 352, 355 - Leslie, 329, 353 - Longman, G. H., 339, 347, 349 - Lucas, 349, 354, 355 - Lyttelton, 349, 350 - Lyttelton, Hon. A., 354, 355 - Lyttelton, Hon. C. G. (now Lord), 335, 337, 355 - Macan, 349–351 - Maitland, W. F., 334, 354, 355 - Makinson, J., 329, 335, 336, 354 - Manning, Henry (Cardinal), 330 - Marsham, C. D., 328, 329, 334–336, 344, 352, 355 - Mills, W., 334 - Mitchell, 335, 336, 352, 354, 355 - Money, 337, 340 - O’Brien, 329 - Onslow, D. R., 337 - Ottaway, 339–342, 346, 351, 354 - Palairet, 354 - Patterson, 346–348, 350 - Pauncefote, 340, 341, 344, 346, 353, 354, 355 - Payne, A., 335 - Pelham, Hon. F. G., 334, 352, 355 - Plowden, H. M., 334, 335, 337, 352, 355 - Powys, W. N., 334, 339 - Pulman, 347, 348, 351 - Rashleigh, 354 - Raynor, 339 - Ridding, A., 328 - Ridding, C. H., 328 - Ridley, A. W., 338, 346–350, 352, 355 - Rock, C. W., 334 - Royle, 347–350 - St. Croix, W. de, 334 - Salter, H. W., 334, 335, 337 - Sayres, 336 - Scott, 337, 340 - Sharpe, 346–349 - Sims, 350–352 - Smith, 351 - Smith, A. F., 340 - Stedman, 337 - Steel, A. G., 334, 337, 354, 355 - Stewart, 343, 344, 345 - Studd, C. T., 334, 354, 355 - Tabor, 339 - Thornton, 337 - Tobin, 337 - Townshend, 342, 346 - Traill, W. F., 334, 355 - Tuck, G. H., 334 - Tylecote, 339–342, 346, 348, 354 - Voules, S. C., 334, 354 - Walker, J., 338 - Walker, R. D., 328, 329, 338, 354 - Ward, 341, 342 - Ward, Rev. A. R., 314, 344–347 - Ward, Harrison, 340 - Warner, 353 - Webbe, 346, 347, 350 - Wells, 334 - Wills, T. W., 329 - Woods, S. M. J., 334, 338, 355, 373 - Wordsworth (late Bishop of St. Andrews), 329–333 - Wright, 336, 355 - Yardley, 335–337, 339–341, 344, 345, 346, 353, 354, 355 - Yonge, G. E., 336 - - University cricket-match, the, 328; - rules of qualification to play in, 328; - advantage of playing on own ground, 329; - Bishop Wordsworth’s account of the first Inter-University match, - 330–333; - results of matches, 333; - quality of the bowling, 333, 352; - individual scores, 335, 336; - celebrated bowlers, 336, 337; - Mr. S. E. Butler’s great bowling feat, 337; - batting failures, 338; - vicissitudes of the contests, 339; - the two-run success of Cambridge, 339–346; - the six-run victory of Oxford, 346–352; - public schools and the University elevens, 353; - all-round players, 354 - - - Wicket-keeper, duties of, 209, 219, 220, 251–255 - - Wicket-keepers:-- - Anson, T. A., 275, 276 - Blackham, J. M., 268, 276, 277, 316, 317, 320 - Box, Tom, 76, 276 - Bush, 276 - Gay, 276 - Hunter, 276 - Jarvis, 277 - Jenner, Herbert, 276 - Kemble, 276 - Leatham, 276 - Lilley, 276 - Lockyer, 276 - Lyttelton, Alfred, 240, 276 - McGregor, G., 212, 213, 276, 320 - Mortlock, 268 - Newton, 276 - Nicholson, W., 276 - Philipson, 276 - Pilling, 212, 276 - Pinder, George, 276, 277, 309 - Plumb, 276 - Pooley, 276 - Ridding, W., 276 - Sherwin, 252, 253, 276 - Storer, 215, 276 - Tylecote, E. F. S., 276 - Tylecote, H. G., 274 - Wenman, E. G., 276 - - - Yorkers, 58, 128, 129 - - -_Spottiswoode & Co. Printers, New-street Square, London._ - - - - -Transcriber’s Note - - -On page 269: - -But though the ball is on the leg side, it is quite possible for the -batsman to hit it on the on side, and send it straight to short-slip’s -hands, if he only could have been in his proper place. - -has been changed to: - -But though the ball is on the leg side, it is quite possible for the -batsman to hit it on the off side, and send it straight to short-slip’s -hands, if he only could have been in his proper place. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Cricket, by -Allan Gibson Steel and Robert Henry Lyttelton - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRICKET *** - -***** This file should be named 52684-0.txt or 52684-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/2/6/8/52684/ - -Produced by MWS, Fay Dunn and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |