Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Coucy-le-Château" to "Crocodile" / Volume 7, Slice 6

by Various

There are nine ways in which the batsman, or “striker,” can be put out. Of these the following five are the most important. (1) The striker is “bowled” out if the bowler hits the wicket with the ball, when bowling, and dislodges the bail; (2) he is “caught” out if the ball after touching his bat or hand be held by any member of the fielding side before it touches the ground; (3) he is “stumped” out if the wicket-keeper dislodges the bail with the ball, or with his hand holding the ball, at a moment when the striker in playing at the ball has no part of his person or bat in contact with the ground behind the popping crease, i.e. when the batsman is “out of his ground”; (4) he is out “l.b.w.” (leg before wicket) if he stops with any part of his person other than his hand, or arm below the elbow, a ball which in the umpire’s judgment pitched straight between the wickets, and would have bowled the striker’s wicket; (5) if when the batsmen are attempting to make a run a wicket is put down (i.e. the bail dislodged) by the ball, or by the hand of any fieldsman holding the ball, at a moment when neither batsman has any part of his person or bat on the ground behind the popping crease, the nearer of the two batsmen to the wicket so put down is “run out.” The remaining four ways in which a batsman may be dismissed are (6) hit wicket, (7) handling the ball, (8) hitting the ball more than once “with intent to score,” and (9) obstructing the field.

The positions of the fieldsmen are those which experience proves to be best adapted for the purpose of saving runs and getting the batsmen caught out. During the middle of the 19th century these positions became almost stereotyped according to the pace of the bowler’s delivery and whether the batsmen were right or left handed. A certain number of fielders stood on the “on” side, i.e. the side of the wicket on which the batsman stands, and a certain number on the opposite or “off” side, towards which the batsman faces. “Point” almost invariably was placed square with the striker’s wicket some ten or a dozen yards distant on the “off” side; “cover point” to the right of “point” (as he is looking towards the batsman) and several yards deeper; “mid on” a few yards to the right of the bowler, and “mid off” in a corresponding position on his left, and so forth. Good captains at all times exercised judgment in modifying to some extent the arrangement of the field according to circumstances, but in this respect much was learnt from the Australians, who on their first visit to England in 1878 varied the positions of the field according to the idiosyncrasies of the batsmen and other exigencies to a degree not previously practised in England. The perfection of wicket-keeping displayed by the Australian, McCarthy Blackham (b. 1855), taught English cricketers that on modern grounds the “long stop” could be altogether dispensed with; and this position, which in former days was considered a necessary and important one, has since been practically abolished. In many matches at the present day, owing to the character of modern bowling, no more than a single fieldsman is placed on the “on” side, while the number and positions of those “in the slips,” i.e. behind the wicket on the “off” side, are subject to no sort of rule, but vary according to the nature of the bowling, the state of the ground, or any other circumstances that may influence the judgment of the captain of the fielding side. Charts such as were once common, showing the positions of the fielders for fast, slow and medium bowling respectively, would therefore to-day give no true idea of the actual practice; and much of the skill of modern captaincy is shown in placing the field.

The score is compiled by runs made by the batsman and by the addition of “extras,” the latter consisting of “byes,” “leg-byes,” “wides” and “no-balls.” All these are included in the designation “runs,” of which the total score is composed, though neither “wides” nor “no-balls” involve any actual run on the part of the batsmen. They are called by the umpire on his own initiative, in the one case if the bowler’s delivery passes the batsman beyond the reach of his bat (“wide”), and in the other if he delivers the ball without having either foot touching the ground behind the “bowling crease” and within the “return crease,” or if the ball be jerked or thrown instead of being bona fide “bowled.” “Wides” and “no-balls” count as one “run” each, and all “extras” are added to the score of the side without being credited to any individual batsman. The batsman may, however, hit a “no-ball” and make runs off it, the runs so made being scored to the striker’s credit instead of the “no-ball” being entered among the “extras.” The batsman may be “run out” in attempting a run off a “no-ball,” but cannot be put out off it in any other way. “Byes” are runs made off a ball which touches neither the bat nor the person of the batsman, “leg-byes” off a ball which, without touching the bat or hand, touches any other part of his person. With the exception of these “extras” the score consists entirely of runs made off the bat.

Batting is the most scientific feature of the game. Proficiency in it, as in golf and tennis, depends in the first instance to a great extent on the player assuming a correct attitude for making his stroke, the position of leg, shoulder and Batting. elbow being a matter of importance; and although a quick and accurate eye may occasionally be sufficient by itself to make a tolerably successful run-getter, good style can never be acquired, and a consistently high level of achievement can seldom be gained, by a batsman who has neglected these rudiments. Good batting consists in a defence that is proof against all the bowler’s craft, combined with the skill to seize every opportunity for making runs that the latter may inadvertently offer. If the batsman’s whole task consisted in keeping the ball out of his wicket, the accomplishment of his art would be comparatively simple; it is the necessity for doing this while at the same time he must prevent the ball from rising off his bat into the air in the direction of any one of eleven skilfully-placed fielders, each eager to catch him out, that offers scope for the science of a Grace, a MacLaren or a Trumper. In early days when the wickets were low and the ball was trundled along the ground, the curved bats of the old pictures were probably well adapted for hitting, defence being neglected; but when the height of the wickets was raised, and bowlers began to pitch the ball closer to the batsman so that it would reach the wicket on the first bound, defence of the wicket became more necessary and more difficult. Hence the modern straight-bladed bat was produced, and a more scientific method of batting became possible. Batting and bowling have in fact developed together, a new form of attack requiring a new form of defence. One of the first principles a young batsman has to learn is to play with a “a straight bat” when defending his wicket against straight balls. This means that the whole blade of the bat should be equally opposite to the line on which the ball is travelling towards him, in order that the ball, to whatever height it may bound from the ground, may meet the bat unless it rises altogether over the batsman’s hands; the tendency of the untutored cricketer being on the contrary to hold the bat sloping outwards from the handle to the point, as the golf-player holds his “driver,” so that the rise of the ball is apt to carry it clear of the blade. Standing then in a correct position and playing with a straight bat, the batsman’s chief concern is to calculate accurately the “length” of the ball as soon as he sees it leave the bowler’s hand. The “length” of the ball means the distance from the batsman at which it pitches, and “good length” is the first essential of the bowler’s art. The distance that constitutes “good length” is not, however, to be defined by precise measurement; it depends on the condition of the ground, and on the reach of the batsman. A “good-length ball” is one that pitches too far from the batsman for him to reach out to meet it with the bat at the moment it touches the ground or immediately it begins to rise, in the manner known as “playing forward”; and at the same time not far enough from him to enable him to wait till after it has reached the highest point in its bound before playing it with the bat, i.e. “playing back.” When, owing to the good length of the ball, the batsman is unable to play it in either of these two ways, but is compelled to play at it in the middle of its rise from the ground, he is almost certain, if he does not miss it altogether, to send it up in the air with the danger of being caught out. If through miscalculation the batsman plays forward to a short-pitched ball, he will probably give a catch to the bowler or “mid off,” if he plays back to a well-pitched-up ball, he will probably miss it and be bowled out. The bowler is therefore continually trying to pitch balls just too short for safe forward play, while the batsman defends his wicket by playing forward or back as his judgment directs so long as the bowling is straight and of approximately good length, and is ready the instant he receives a bad-length ball, or one safely wide of the wicket, to hit it along the ground clear of the fieldsmen so as to make as many runs as he and his partner can accomplish before the ball is returned to the wicket-keeper or the bowler. But even those balls off which runs are scored are not to be hit recklessly or without scientific method. A different stroke is brought into requisition according to the length of the ball and its distance wide of the wicket to the “off” or “on” as the case may be; and the greatest batsmen are those who with an almost impregnable defence combine the greatest variety of strokes, which as occasion demands they can make with confidence and certainty. There are, however, comparatively few cricketers who do not excel in some particular strokes more than in others. One will make most of his runs by “cuts” past “point,” or by wrist strokes behind the wicket, while others, like the famous Middlesex Etonian C. I. Thornton, and the Australian C. J. Bonnor, depend mainly on powerful “drives” into the deep field behind the bowler’s wicket. Some again, though proficient in all-round play, develop exceptional skill in some one stroke which other first-class players seldom attempt. A good illustration is the “glance stroke” off the legs which K. S. Ranjitsinhji made with such ease and grace. All great cricketers in fact, while observing certain general principles, display some individuality of style, and a bowler who is familiar with a batsman’s play is often aware of some idiosyncrasy of which he can take advantage in his attack.

Bowling is, indeed, scarcely less scientific than batting. It is not, however, so systematically taught to young amateurs, and it may be partly in consequence of this neglect that amateur bowling is exceedingly weak in England as Bowling. compared with that of professionals. The evolution of the art of bowling, for it has been an evolution, is an interesting chapter in the history of cricket which can only be briefly outlined here. The fundamental law as to the proper mode of the bowler’s delivering the ball is that the ball must be bowled, not thrown or jerked. When bowling underhand along the ground was superseded by “length bowling,” it was found that the ball might be caused, by jerking, to travel at a pace which on the rough grounds was considered dangerous; hence the law against jerking, which was administered practically by chalking the inside of the bowler’s elbow; if a chalk mark was found on his side, the ball was not allowed as fair. The necessity of keeping the elbow away from the side led gradually to the extension of the arm horizontally and to round-arm bowling, the invention of which is usually attributed to John Wills (or Willes; b. 1777) of Kent and Sussex. Nyren, however, says “Tom Walker (about 1790) began the system of throwing instead of bowling now so much the fashion”; and, “The first I recollect seeing revive this fashion was Wills, a Sussex man,” the date of the revival being 1807. Walker was no-balled. Beldham (1766-1862) says, “The law against jerking was owing to the frightful pace Tom Walker put on, and I believe that he afterwards tried something more like the modern throwing-bowling. Willes was not the inventor of that kind, or round-arm bowling. He only revived what was forgotten or new to the young folk.” Curiously enough, Beldham also writes of the same Tom Walker that he was “the first lobbing slow bowler” he ever saw, and that he “did feel so ashamed of such baby bowling, but after all he did more than even David Harris himself.” Round-arm bowling was long and vigorously opposed, especially in 1826 when three matches were arranged between England and Sussex, the Sussex bowlers being round-arm bowlers. When England had lost the first two matches, nine of the professionals refused to take part in the third, “unless the Sussex bowlers bowl fair, that is, abstain from throwing.” Five of them did play and Sussex lost, but the new style of bowling had indicated its existence. In 1844 the M.C.C.’s revised law reads, “The ball must be bowled, not thrown or jerked, and the hand must not be above the shoulder in delivery.” Round-arm bowling was thenceforth legal. In 1862 Willsher (1828-1885), the Kent bowler, was no-balled by the umpire (Lillywhite) for raising his hand too high, amid a scene of excitement that almost equalled a tumult. Overhand bowling was legalized on the 10th of June 1864 after strenuous opposition. In early days much importance was attached to great pace, but the success of the slow lobbing bowling (pitched up underhand) led to its cultivation; in both styles some of the best performers delivered the ball with a curious high action, thrusting the ball, as it were, from close under the arm-pit. When the advantages of bias (or twist, or break) were first known is not closely recorded, but we read of one Lamborn who (about 1800) could make the ball break from leg so that “the Kent and Surrey men could not tell what to make of that cursed twist of his.” Whatever the pace of bowling, accuracy is the essential point, or, more correctly, the power of accurately varying pace, pitch and direction, so that the batsman is never at peace. If the bowler is a mere machine, the batsman soon becomes his master; but the question as to which of the two is supreme depends very largely on the condition of the turf, whether it be hard and true, soft and wet, hard and rough or soft and drying: the first pair of conditions favour the batsmen, the second pair the bowler.

The immense amount of labour and expense devoted to the preparation and care of cricket grounds has produced during the past quarter of a century a perfection of smoothness in the turf which has materially altered the character of the game. On the rough and fiery pitches of earlier days, on which a “long stop” was indispensable, the behaviour of the ball could not be reckoned upon by the batsman with any degree of confidence. The first ball of an “over” might be a “shooter,” never rising as much as an inch off the ground, the next might bound over his head, and the third pursue some equally eccentric course. But on the best grounds of to-day, subject to the well-understood changes due to weather, the bound of the ball is so regular as to be calculable with reasonable certainty by the batsman. The result has been that in fine weather, when wickets are true and fast, bowlers have become increasingly powerless to defeat the batsmen. In other words the defence has been strengthened out of proportion to the attack. Bowlers have consequently to a great extent abandoned all attempt to bowl the wicket down, aiming instead at effecting their purpose by bowling close to but clear of the wicket, with the design of getting the batsman to give catches. Many batsmen of the stubbornly defensive type, known in cricket slang as “stonewallers,” retaliated by leaving such balls alone together, or stopping them deliberately with the legs instead of the bat.

These tactics caused the game to become very slow; over after over was bowled without an attempt being made to score a run and without apparent prospect of getting a wicket. This not only injured the popularity of the game from the spectator’s point of view, but, in conjunction with the enormous scores that became common in dry seasons, made it so difficult to finish a match within the three days to which first-class matches in England are invariably limited, that nearly 70% of the total number of fixtures in some seasons were drawn. Cricketers of an older generation have complained that the cause of this is partly to be found in the amount of time wasted by contemporary cricketers. These critics see no reason why half of a summer’s day should be allowed to elapse before cricket begins, and they comment with some scorn on the interval for tea, and the fastidiousness with which play is frequently interrupted on account of imperfect light or for other unimperative reasons. Various suggestions have been made, including proposals for enlarging the wicket, for enabling the attack to hold its own against the increasing strength of the defence. But the M.C.C., the only recognized source of cricket legislation, has displayed a cautious but wise conservatism, due to the fact that its authority rests on no sanction more formal than that of prestige tacitly admitted by the cricketing world; and consequently no drastic changes have been made in the laws of the game, the only important amendments of recent years being that which now permits a side to close its innings voluntarily under certain conditions, and that which, in substitution for the former hard and fast rule for the “follow on,” has given an option in the matter to the side possessing the requisite lead on the first innings.

Early Players.—If the era of the present form of cricket can very properly be dated from the visit of the first Australian team to England in 1878, some enumeration must be made of a few of the cricketers who took part in first-class matches in the earlier portion of the 19th century. Among amateurs should be noted the two fast bowlers, Sir F. H. Bathurst (1807-1881; Eton, Hampshire), and Harvey Fellowes (b. 1826; Eton); the batsman N. Felix (1804-1876; Surrey and Kent), who was a master of “cutting” and one of the earliest to adopt batting gloves; the cricketing champion of his time Alfred Mynn (1807-1861; Kent); and the keen player F. P. Miller (1828-1875; Surrey). The three Marshams, Rev. C. D. Marsham (b. 1835), R. H. B. Marsham (b. 1833) and G. Marsham (b. 1849), all of Eton and Oxford, were as famous as the Studds in the ’eighties; and R. Hankey (1832-1886; Harrow and Oxford) was a great scorer. In the next generation one of the greatest bats of his own or any time was R. A. H. Mitchell (1843-1905; Eton, Oxford, Hants). A very attractive run-getter was C. F. Buller (b. 1846; Harrow, Middlesex); an all too brief career was that of C. J. Ottaway (1850-1878; Eton, Oxford, Kent and Middlesex); whilst A. Lubbock (b. 1845; Eton, Kent) was a sound bat, and D. Buchanan (1830-1900; Rugby and Cambridge) a destructive bowler, as was also A. Appleby (1843-1902; Lancashire).

Of the professionals, Fuller Pilch (1803-1870) and E. G. Wenman (1803-1897) were great bats; T. Box (1808-1876) the most skilled wicket-keeper of his time; W. Lillywhite (1792- 1854), one of the first round-arm bowlers, renowned for the accuracy of his pitch, and W. Clark (1798-1856) possessed wonderful variety of pace and pitch. It was the last-named who organized the All England Eleven, and he was not chosen to represent the players until he had reached the age of forty-seven. George Parr (1826-1891), the greatest leg-hitter in England, had no professional rival until the advent of Richard Daft (1835- 1900). J. Dean (1816-1891) was the finest long-stop, Julius Caesar (1830-1878) a hard clean hitter, as was G. Anderson (1826-1902), and T. Lockyer (1826-1869) seems to have been the first prominent wicket-keeper who took balls wide on the leg-side. Of bowlers, E. Willsher (1828-1885) would seem to have been the most difficult, W. Martingell (1818-1897) being a very good medium-paced bowler, and J. Wisden (1826-1884) a very fast bowler but short in his length. Four famous bowlers of a later date are George Freeman (1844-1895), J. Jackson (1833-1901), G. Tarrant (1838-1870) and G. Wootton (b. 1834). With them must be mentioned the great batsmen, T. Hayward (1835-1876) and R. Carpenter (1830-1901), as well as two other keen cricketers, H. H. Stephenson (1833-1896) and T. Hearne (1826-1900).

Since the first half of the 19th century the sort of cricket to engage public attention has very greatly changed, and the change has become emphasized since the exchange of visits between Australian and English teams has become an established feature of first-class cricket. First-class cricket has become more formal, more serious and more spectacular. The contest for the county championship has introduced an annual competition, closely followed by the public, between standing rivals familiar with each other’s play and record; an increased importance has become attached to “averages” and “records,” and it is felt by some that the purely sporting side of the game has been damaged by the change. Professionalism has increased, and it is an open secret that not a few players who appear before the public as amateurs derive an income under some pretext or other from the game. Cricket on the village green has in many parts of the country almost ceased to exist, while immense crowds congregate to watch county matches in the great towns; but this must no doubt be in part attributed to the movement of population from the country districts; and some compensation is to be found in league cricket (see below), and in the numerous clubs for the employees of business firms and large shops, and for the members of social institutes of all kinds, which play matches in the suburbs of London and other cities. At an earlier period two great professional organizations, “The All England,” formed in 1846, and “The United All England,” toured the country, mainly for profit, playing local sides in which “given men,” generally good professional players, figured. They did much good work in popularizing the game, and an annual match between the two at Lord’s on Whit-Monday was once a great feature of the season; but the increase of county cricket led eventually to their disbandment.