Cardus on Grace, immortality and the press
Bob Dubery
entitled The Champion.
Other than the typical Cardusian prose, I like this because, in the late
20s, Cardus was complaining about something that troubles me today - the
tendency of the press to sensationalise.
Grace was fifteen years old when, in 1863, he made 32 against the
All-England XI and the bowling of Jackson, Tarrant and Tinley. He
established himself as a master batsman in a period of fast, slinging
bowling. And in those days the pitches were often dangerously rough. Grace
killed the "brute strength" school of attack; he always revelled in the fast
ball. One afternoon at Lord's the crowd rose as one man and cheered him for
stopping four consecutive shooters. This ball, the deadliest of all, because
no batsman can possibly anticipate it, was common enough in Grace's heyday.
If and when the modern batsman receives a "shooter" he looks aggrieved to
the soul; usually the groundsman is called up after the match and
cross-examined by the committee. In cricket, when there is the possibility
of a shooter coming along, the skill even of a Grace is hedged round by
mortality all the time; it is though a Kreisler were playing the violin
beautifully on a platform which might at any moment collapse. "How do you
stop a shooter", somebody once asked Grace. He replied with a true Victorian
relish of first principle: "Why, you put your bat to the ball." A blade of
willow was Grace's chief weapon in offence or defence. He kept his left leg
so close to the bat when he played forward that, as an old professional told
me, "not a bit of daylight could be seen between them." He taught the gospel
of the straight bat, the left shoulder forward to all well-pitched bowling.
"The first time I ever saw Grace play," Mr A.C.M Croome has written, "was in
August 1876. He celebrated the occasion by taking 318 not out off of the
Yorkshire bowlers. Earlier in the week he had made 177 against
Nottinghamshire, and on the preceding Friday and Saturday 344 at Canterbury
for the M.C.C against Kent. It is on record that he made over 1200 runs in
first-class cricket during the month of August; and he found time before
September came to run up to Grimsby and score 400 not out for the United
South against 22 of the district. That would be a normal month for him if he
would begin again today, knowing what even bowlers and wicket-keepers know
no of back strokes, played with the second line of defence, and enjoying the
advantages so plentifully bestowed upon his successors - truer wickets,
longer overs, shorter boundaries."
It is argued by any sceptic of the present time that Grace was never called
on to play the Googly and the swerve? In the eighties, Walter Wright and
Sherlock could make a ball swerve, but not sufficiently to trouble the
champion. He never had a chance to show, while at his best, what he could do
against the Googly. There is no evidence in his career to suggest that he
would not have used the ball as every other. The man who could stop four
consecutive shooters was, I fancy, capable of anything on the cricket field.
The history of the technical development of cricket has not yet been written
and probably never will be, because not until recently has the day by day
criticism taken the trouble to examine the machinery from within. Cricket
reports in Grace's time were concerned only with the facts as discerned from
the score desk. Little has been recorded of the Master's fine shades of
method and style. Perhaps it's a well; I tremble to think what W.G would
have had to say of any modern writer who wrote of his play in terms of
either the poet or the pedant. "You must put your bat to the ball," we can
imagine him telling us. "And who the hangment was Zeus?" The remarkable fact
about the great players of Grace's day was that they won their immortality
without the aid of that school of literary criticism which at the present
time is ready to "write up" the next honest flock of geese as so many
handsome and immortal swans. Today the word "great" is attached to each and
every innings of a hundred runs scored industriously on a flawless wicket in
four hours. The newspapers must be able to get out a flamboyant headline,
and it wouldn't do to print: "Another dull innings by Bloggs." Not long ago
I had the occasion to hunt amongst the files of a newspaper of the summer of
1895. I found a report of a match between Gloucestershire and Middlesex. It
was set in very small type. Grace scored more than 150 in this engagement.
The headline in the paper, to the account of this match, stated soberly and
minutely "Another good innings by Dr. Grace."
Cricketislife!
a true Victorian relish of first principle: "Why, you put your bat to
the ball."
That was really enjoyable, BOB Thanks for typing an extract. Enjoyable
and cant agree more on his theme out there. shouldnt forget thought he
was breathless in his worship of his fav cricketers and I like that
style. Not exaggerating ordinary innings but if there is a great knock
played, then one should give its due. Though nowadays there seems to be
lot of planted stories, writers who say what their cricketers want to
hear..
-
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove n-5o+sp6pa0mm
Cricketislife!
C.B. Fry writing on W.G. Grace, the greatest legend of all cricket
legends.
C.B. Fry on WG
"W.G. always reminds me of Henry VIII. Henry VIII solidified into a
legend when he had already involved himself in several matrimonial
tangles and had become over weighted with flesh and religious
controversies. Yet Henry in his physical prime had been the premier
athlete of England, a notable wrestler, an accomplished horseman and a
frequent champion in the military tournaments of his time. So it is with
W.G. He figures in the general mind in the heavy habit of his latter
years on the cricket fields, a bearded giant heavy of gait and limb and
wonderful as having outlived his contemporaries as a giant of cricket.
Even when disputes in clubs and pavilions canvas the relative merits of
W.G., Ranji and Don Bradman, the picture in the mind of the disputants
is of a big, heavy Englishman, a slim lithe Oriental, and a nimble
lightweight Australian."
==
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove nn7osp-8pa+mm
Cricketislife!
W.G. GRACE
In recent years his great bulk has seemed to recede. Others following
long after him have left his performances statistically behind. In his
career he scored 54,896 runs, average 39.55 He also took 2,876 wickets,
average 17.92 He scored 126 hundreds in first-class matches, a number
exceeded by Sir Jack Hobbs, Hendren, Hammond, Mead, Sutcliffe, Woolley
and Sir Leonard Hutton.
None of these, not even Sir Jack, dominated for decades all other
players, none of them lasted so long, or wore a beard of his commanding
growth. In the summer of 1871 his aggregate of runs was 2,739, average
78.25. The next best batsman that year was Richard Daft, average 37.
A Hobbs, a Bradman, a Hutton, a Compton might easily any year amass more
than 2,000 runs, averaging round about the 70’s. But some other batsmen
will be running them close, as far as figures go, averaging 50, 60 and
so on.
Grace, in 1871, achieved an average which was proof that he stood alone
in consistent skill, twice as skilful as the next best! His career
ranged from the age of 17, in 1865, until 1908, when he was nearing
sixty years. He had turned the fiftieth year of his life when for the
Gentlemen v. the Players at Kennington Oval he scored 82 and one of the
attack he coped with magisterially was none other than S.F. Barnes,
approaching his best.
All these facts and figures tell us no more of the essential W.G. than
we are told of Johann Sebastian Bach if all his fugues, cantatas,
suites, and even the B Minor Mass, are added up.
In a way he invented what we now call modern cricket. His national
renown packed cricket grounds everywhere. He laid the foundations of
county cricket economy. The sweep of his energy, his authority, and
prowess, his personal presence, caused cricket to expand beyond a game.
His bulk and stride carried cricket into the highways of our national
life.
He became a representative Victorian, a father figure. People not
particularly interested in cricket found the fact of W.G.’s eminence
looming into their social consciousness. The Royal family (in those days
too) inquired from time to time about his health — a formal request,
because W.G. was seldom, if ever, unwell.
We must not remember him as the Grand Old Man of his closing years. He
was an athlete, a champion thrower of the cricket ball, a jumper of
hurdles. Yet, though I have seen portraits of him taken in early
manhood, in his late teens in fact, I have never seen a portrait of a
beardless W.G. Is such a one in existence anywhere?
Ranjitsinhji wrote in his Jubilee book (or C.B. Fry wrote it for him)
that "‘W.G.’ transformed the single stringed instrument into the many
chorded lyre" which, translated, means that W.G. elaborated batsmanship,
combined back-and-forward play for the first time, and perfected the
technique of placing the ball.
When he began to play cricket, round-arm bowling had been the fashion
for some thirty years. He inherited a technique formed from an obsolete
attack and soon he was belabouring over-arm fast bowling at ease—often
on rough wickets. He murdered the fastest stuff right and left.
He kept his left leg so close to the ball when he played forward that an
old professional of the late 1900’s told me (long after his retirement)
that W.G. never let me see daylight between pads and bat. "Ah used to
try mi best to get’im out on a good wicket, then suddenly summat ‘give’
in me, and we all knew it were hopeless." If W.G. kept religiously to a
rigid right foot in his batting, we must take it for granted, from the
greatness he carved out of the game, that this principle suited all the
needs and circumstances of cricket as he had to meet them.
It is stupid to argue that he couldn’t have scored heavily against
bowlers of 1963. He mastered the bowling problems presented in his
period. Logically, then, we can demonstrate that he would have mastered
those of today.
W.G.’s mastery over speed compelled bowlers to think again. Thus,
ironically, he was the cause of the first extensive developments of
spin. A.C.M. Croome played with Grace (later he became cricket
correspondent of The Times, one of the most learned). "The first season
I saw Grace play," he wrote, "was 1876. In August he scored 318 v.
Yorkshire. Earlier in the week he had made 177 v. Nottinghamshire, and
on the previous Friday and Saturday 344 at Canterbury v. Kent. He scored
1200 runs in first-class cricket during that month of August, yet he
found time before September came to run up to Grimsby and score 400 not
out for United South against twenty-two of the district. That would be a
normal month for him if he could begin again today, knowing that even
bowlers and wicket-keepers know now all about the ‘second line of
defence,’ and enjoy the advantages of true wickets, longer overs and
shorter boundaries.
He conquered the entire world and range of the game — 15 centuries v.
the Players, so that in 18 years of his reign the Players won only seven
times. He scored 1,000 runs in May 1895, within two months of his 47th
birthday, scored two hundreds in one match v. Kent; took 17 wickets in
one and the same match v. Notts; and took all ten wickets in an innings
v. Oxford University.
He was cricket of his period personified; he was one of the eminent
Victorians; he had the large girth and humanity of the foremost
Englishmen of his epoch. Nobody before him, nobody following greatly in
his train, has loomed to his stature or so much stood for cricket, or
done as richly for it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Six Giants of the Wisden Century by Cardus
see http://india.wisden.com/Almanack/item.asp?colid=44113596
---
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove n3osp-pa+1m
Bob Dubery
"Bob Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3eacb2c6$0$2...@hades.is.co.za...
> "The first time I ever saw Grace play," Mr A.C.M Croome has written, "was
in
> August 1876. He celebrated the occasion by taking 318 not out off of the
> Yorkshire bowlers. Earlier in the week he had made 177 against
> Nottinghamshire, and on the preceding Friday and Saturday 344 at
Canterbury
> for the M.C.C against Kent. It is on record that he made over 1200 runs in
> first-class cricket during the month of August; and he found time before
> September came to run up to Grimsby and score 400 not out for the United
> South against 22 of the district.
Interestingly Rae's biography of Grace (W.G. Grace, Faber and
Faber,0-571-19573-3) has the Grimsby match taking place in July. There's
some good Gracian legend attached to this fixture.
Grace took the United South up to Grimsby for an odds match just as his wife
Agnes was coming full term in her second pregnancy. The hosts were not happy
as they considered the XI that Grace had laid on to be a weak one (despite
it including W.G, G.F, Alfred Pooley and Walter Gilbert).
Most of the team were late in arriving, so Grace opened the batting with one
Tom Humphrey who was not known for his prowess with the bat. Grace himself
was caught plumb in front of the wicket when he had but 6. But the umpire,
Mortlock, turned it down because it was an odds match and the crowd wanted
to see Grace bat. He said that evening "I did it all for the best, they had
such a bad team that I thought it inadvisable to give him out early in the
game." (!)
That decision had decidedly non-trivial consequences. The supposedly weak
United South were 217/2 overnight and Grace himself had 136 not out. G.F was
looking well set and Gilbert was still to bat. And, as it turned out, Grace
wasn't nearly done.
The next morning Grace continued his run-getting. Proceedings were halted
just before lunch when a telegram was delivered to Grace. This bought news
of the birth of his second son and he invited the 22 Grimsby players to join
him for champagne. During this interlude he proposed a toast to Agnes and
then added "I should like to break a record and celebrate it."
G.F. holed out a little later but W.G carried on with Gilbert now partnering
him. He gave a chance at 180, but the 'keeper dropped it. He was dropped
again, at slip, on 260. Shortly thereafter he passed his previous best score
in all cricket - 268. Grace carried on, passing the 300. By the end of the
second day the "weak" United South had 537/4 - Grace 313* Gilbert 101*.
There was a flurry of wickets the next morning, but Grace's wasn't amongst
them. Eventually the last wicket fell with the total at 681. The scoreboard
showed only the grand total, and so Grace walked over to the scoreboard and
asked the scorer what his own tally was. "399" was the reply. "Oh make it
400. Well you deserve it."
Even without the addition of the extra run it was still a gargantuan knock.
Grace had faced 15 bowlers, and scored four 6s, twenty-seven 4s, six 3s,
fifty-eight 2s and 133 or 134 singles. It was by some distance the largest
score ever made in an odds match and only 4 (or 5) short of the record for
any class of cricket.
Bob Dubery
"Cricketislife!" <cricketislif...@web2news.net> wrote in message
news:2708...@web2news.com...
> unrelated to the theme of Bob' posting but nevertheless..
> So it is with
> W.G. He figures in the general mind in the heavy habit of his latter
> years on the cricket fields, a bearded giant heavy of gait and limb and
> wonderful as having outlived his contemporaries as a giant of cricket.
> Even when disputes in clubs and pavilions canvas the relative merits of
> W.G., Ranji and Don Bradman, the picture in the mind of the disputants
> is of a big, heavy Englishman, a slim lithe Oriental, and a nimble
> lightweight Australian."
Indeed Grace was quite an athlete as a younger man and was quite a sprinter.
I believe he also won some cricket ball throwing competitions. And he'd
compete in ANYTHING if it meant having the chance to get one over E.M.
Cricketislife!
tally was. "399" was the> reply. "Oh make it> 400. Well you deserve it."
>
There is a similar confusion, or rather mystery about that 555
partnership , isnt it, a missing solitary run was found and attributed
the the batsmen and partnership was recorded 555! and ofcourse it became
the record and acc to some quizes also the origin of the naming of 555
cigarette..
-
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove n-3o2s+paamm
John Hall
Cricketislife! <cricketislif...@web2news.net> writes:
>Grace walked over to> the scoreboard and> asked the scorer what his own
>tally was. "399" was the> reply. "Oh make it> 400. Well you deserve it."
>>
>
>There is a similar confusion, or rather mystery about that 555
>partnership , isnt it, a missing solitary run was found and attributed
>the the batsmen and partnership was recorded 555! and ofcourse it became
>the record and acc to some quizes also the origin of the naming of 555
>cigarette..
>
Yes. The story goes that the scoreboard was in error by one. The old
record was 554, and when the board showed that it had been passed
Sutcliffe gave his wicket away. But then the board went back from 555 to
554. Consternation! But then a convenient extra that had been overlooked
was discovered. :)
--
John Hall
"Honest criticism is hard to take,
particularly from a relative, a friend,
an acquaintance, or a stranger." Franklin P Jones
Ross Smith
> Cardus on WG again..
>
> W.G. GRACE
> In recent years his great bulk has seemed to recede. Others following
> long after him have left his performances statistically behind. In his
> career he scored 54,896 runs, average 39.55 He also took 2,876 wickets,
> average 17.92 He scored 126 hundreds in first-class matches, a number
> exceeded by Sir Jack Hobbs, Hendren, Hammond, Mead, Sutcliffe, Woolley
> and Sir Leonard Hutton.
How many of Grace's 100s were in 11 v 11 f-c matches?
<snip>
Mad Hamish
>"Cricketislife!" <cricketislif...@web2news.net> wrote in message news:<2709...@web2news.com>...
>> Cardus on WG again..
>>
>> W.G. GRACE
>> In recent years his great bulk has seemed to recede. Others following
>> long after him have left his performances statistically behind. In his
>> career he scored 54,896 runs, average 39.55 He also took 2,876 wickets,
>> average 17.92 He scored 126 hundreds in first-class matches, a number
>> exceeded by Sir Jack Hobbs, Hendren, Hammond, Mead, Sutcliffe, Woolley
>> and Sir Leonard Hutton.
>
>How many of Grace's 100s were in 11 v 11 f-c matches?
>
by definition all of them.
Matches versus odds aren't first class matches.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@aardvark.net.au
Mike Holmans
>On 28 Apr 2003 15:02:16 -0700, jess...@email.com (Ross Smith) wrote:
>
>>"Cricketislife!" <cricketislif...@web2news.net> wrote in message news:<2709...@web2news.com>...
>>> Cardus on WG again..
>>>
>>> W.G. GRACE
>>> In recent years his great bulk has seemed to recede. Others following
>>> long after him have left his performances statistically behind. In his
>>> career he scored 54,896 runs, average 39.55 He also took 2,876 wickets,
>>> average 17.92 He scored 126 hundreds in first-class matches, a number
>>> exceeded by Sir Jack Hobbs, Hendren, Hammond, Mead, Sutcliffe, Woolley
>>> and Sir Leonard Hutton.
>>
>>How many of Grace's 100s were in 11 v 11 f-c matches?
>>
>by definition all of them.
>Matches versus odds aren't first class matches.
I think you'll find he was alluding to one or two 12 v 12 matches
which were accounted first-class.
Cheers,
Mike
Cricketislife!
I know ur opinions on that Ross!
( http://au.geocities.com/sportandhistory/cricket/grace.html )
Thats Ross' wonderful site where he places his views on Grace hundreds.
Also a nice place to see stuff on Jessop.)
btw Ross, here is Michael Fordham's peice where he does a 'revision' of
WG hundreds but there is a small preface by John Woodcock(first five
small paras are his, then Foldham' peice starts) disagreeing with him,
more on emotion than on facts.
http://india.wisden.com/Almanack/item.asp?colid=44113444
----
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove nn+o9s5pp-a8m
Cricketislife!
Tell me how authentic is the trivia that 555 cigarette was named after
taht partnership. I have heard it in some Indian quizes but still not
come across a authentic source for it.
-
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove n+o9s3ppa9m
Raghu Jetley
> Hall,
> Tell me how authentic is the trivia that 555 cigarette was named after
> taht partnership. I have heard it in some Indian quizes but still not
> come across a authentic source for it.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=YXrXN1AIvW01IwXz%40jackalope.demon.
co.uk
Bob Dubery
<cricketislif...@web2news.net> wrote:
>Ross Smith> How many of Grace's 100s were in 11 v 11 f-c matches?
>
>
>I know ur opinions on that Ross!
>( http://au.geocities.com/sportandhistory/cricket/grace.html )
Very interesting. But several of the matches whose first class status
is disputed include the MCC. Is it possible that in those years all
matches involving the MCC were considered first class?
And are the university matches in England still considered first
class?
Cricketislife!
of 555 cigarette being named after that famous partnership. I dont how
these quiz guys start inventing all sorts of trivias! Brand Equity was
the culprit this time with the above 555 story.
--
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove nn+5osp-8p9a1m
rosssmith.n...@web2news.net
>
>>On 28 Apr 2003 15:02:16 -0700, jess...@email.com (Ross
>> Smith) wrote:
>>
>>>"Cricketislife!"
>>> <cricketislif...@web2news.net> wrote in message news:<2
>>>>
>>>> W.G. GRACE
>>>> In recent years his great bulk has seemed to recede.
>>>> Others following
>>>> long after him have left his performances statistically
>>>> behind. In his
>>>> career he scored 54,896 runs, average 39.55 He also
>>>> took 2,876 wickets,
>>>> average 17.92 He scored 126 hundreds in first-class
>>>> matches, a number
>>>> exceeded by Sir Jack Hobbs, Hendren, Hammond, Mead,
>>>> Sutcliffe, Woolley
>>>> and Sir Leonard Hutton.
>>>
>>>How many of Grace's 100s were in 11 v 11 f-c matches?
>>>
>>by definition all of them.
>>Matches versus odds aren't first class matches.
>
> I think you'll find he was alluding to one or two 12 v 12 matches
> which were accounted first-class.
Actually Mike, there are five 100s in 12 v 12 matches, 1 in an 11 v 15
match, and 1 v Somerset in 1879 which I wouldn't count.
I think his 11 v 11 f-c career record should be seen as
52682 runs @ 39.20, 2694 wickets @ 18.29, and 847 catches/5 stumpings.
Cheers
Ross
rosssmith.n...@web2news.net
> <cricketislif...@web2news.net> wrote:
>
>>Ross Smith> How many of Grace's 100s were in 11 v 11 f-c matches?
>>
>>I know ur opinions on that Ross!
>>( http://au.geocities.com/sportandhistory/cricket/grace.html )
> Very interesting. But several of the matches whose first class status
> is disputed include the MCC. Is it possible that in those years all
> matches involving the MCC were considered first class?
Only if the side playing MCC was also first-class.
> And are the university matches in England still considered first
> class?
Yes - Oxford, Cambridge, Durham and Loughborough.
Not some others like Bradford and Cardiff.
Cheers
Ross
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.sport.cricket
To contact in private, remove n3o+0s-paamm