POLO IN THE UNITED STATES.
“Transatlantic” writes from New York as follows: Although there were not sufficient entries in 1905 to give a contest for the championship of polo, that game is advancing in the United States, not only in the number of players and of clubs, but in the excellence of methods. The repeal of the law against, and thus allowing of, crooking of mallets has proved popular. In this association there are now 542 players rated as active, and 54 players penalised as much as 4 goals, what might be the “Recent Form” list. Dr. Milburn, of Boston, has been advanced from 5 to 6 goals, and Dr. Chauncey, of New York, from 4 to 6 goals. The three highest handicaps at 9 goals are R. L. Agassiz, Foxhall Keene, and Larry Waterbury. In the class at 8 goals are only John Cowdin, Monty Waterbury, and Harry Whitney. The only one at 7 goals is Thos. Hitchcox. There are 35 clubs listed. Regular play has been going on during the winter at Burlinghame, California, and at Camden, South Carolina; and tournaments in the north will begin at the Lakewood New Jersey Club in March.
THE M.C.C. CRICKETERS IN SOUTH AFRICA.
Despatches from the front have not been very reassuring, and the second so-called Test Match was lost by Mr. Warner’s team by the large margin of nine wickets.
The Englishmen lost because they did not score a sufficient number of runs; and their chief trouble throughout this unfortunate tour appears to come from the fact that their batting is extremely unreliable, and they are without the help of steady batsmen of the stamp of Tom Hayward or Quaife, who would go in first and stay there. Certainly Mr. Warner can go in first, but in South Africa he cannot always stay there, and on more than one occasion his side has had two wickets down with but a small score on the board, and this is always a demoralising state of affairs for a moderate batting side.
We understand that in their minor matches at home against clubs and schools it has been the policy of the M.C.C. to send a team which shall, more or less, and often enough less, be of relative strength or weakness to the other side, in order that the game may not be too one-sided. So that an error of judgment in estimating the strength of the opponents may cost the match.
It appears to us that in organising this team for South Africa, the M.C.C. authorities greatly underrated the strength of their opponents, and so from the point of view of the South Africans the tour has rather failed, since they have proved themselves a better lot of cricketers than the visiting team.
On the other hand, an English team touring in Africa has, for mercenary considerations, to play several games against odds in up-country places where the standard of cricket is very low indeed, and where, probably, the first-class African cricketers would never be seen. And for these purposes the more powerful the visiting team the more futile becomes the burlesque of cricket.
As proof of this we need only refer to a week’s work of Mr. Warner’s by no means powerful team. They beat fifteen of King William’s Town by an innings and 296 runs, the Englishmen scoring 415 runs for eight wickets against 75 and 44 by the fifteen. In the next match eighteen of Queenstown were beaten by an innings and 176 runs; the scores being 400 for eight wickets, as against 111 and 113 by the eighteen. For such a performance as this it would obviously not be worth the while of a first-rate cricketer to travel from England to King William’s Town, and yet for the games against All South Africa it is equally not worth while for a moderate cricketer to travel from England to Johannesburg.