CRICKETING CURIOSITIES.

Evening Star, Issue 4123, 15 May 1876, Page 4

CRICKETING CURIOSITIES.

According to Law 29, the ball is dead when it is “finally settled” in the wicketkeeper’s or bowler’s hands, but,the difficulty is to determine when the final settlement shall have occurred. On June 30, 1870, at the Oval, Mr C. E. Nepean was playing for Oxford University v. Surrey, when the question was asked whether he was lb w. The umpire’s decision was in his favor, but the batsman, thinking the decree was against him, left the wicket. It has been stated that Mr Nepean, not hearing what the umpire said, asked Pooley, who replied, “He says you’re out, sir,” and then, when Mr Nepean walked off, whipped off the bails. In this instance—more especially as the umpire’s decision had been asked and obtained—the ball ought certainly to have been considered “ finally settled,” and the second decision disallowed, as was done at Cranbrook on June 27, 1862. in

which instance G. Bennett, playing for Kent v. Yorkshire, had made 70 runs, when E. Stephenson, keeping wicket, asked the umpire “ How’s that ? ” for a catch, and immediately threw the ball up. The umpire said “Not out,” but Bennett, not hearing the reply, but seeing the ball go up, left his wicket, upon which Stephenson, displaced the bails. The umpire at once, however, recalled the batsman, on the ground that the ball was dead (“ finally settled ”). Some people are of opinion that when one umpire has been appealed to and has replied to the question, the ball should always be considered dead ; but in this opinion I do not concur. If tins had been ruled, Jdr C. J. Thornton would have been - allowed to continue his innings when, in the match at Brighton, on June 30, 1870, for Kent v. Sussex, he went in at a slow, and, just touching it, was both caught and stumped, H. Phillips, the wicket-keeper, fust appealed to Lee as to the stumping, and that being in the batsman’s favor, he tried Luck for a catch, and this time gained a verdict.' In a match between Storrington and Brighton, on July 6, 1860, H. Morley,, playing for the latter: oltub,. was given out (run out) for leaving his wicket respecting a dispute before the hall was dead. Without actually seen the occurrence, it is impossible to decidg from reading an account of any such incident in a cricket match the precise moment when the ball becomes. “ finally settled.” Take, for instance, the wrangle at Sheffield, on May .31* 1875, when W. Oscroft was run out. He played at,a ball from Hill to Ullathome, who returned it to Finder, Now the question arises whether the ball was ‘ ‘ finally settled. ” Usually it is considered so when tbe wicket-keeper handlo it, and it all depends whether Finder held tbe ball, and then threw it to Hill to go on with the over, qr whether he let it go like lightning to Hill, to run out Oscroft before the latter could get back to his ground. 0. Coward (Lancashire) in this instance gave the decision “out.” An old trick to d’eceiv e a batsman is to throw to point instead of J co the .wicket-keeper. If .the batsman is not r t o. ticing, he will think that the ball is settled. in e Y 1 ,let-keeper’s 1 et-keeper’s hands, and perhaps go out of his ground. These tricks upon trave .Hers are, however, scarcely cricket. Any how , the umpire’s decision is conclusive, r A nd if good umpires are chosen, and, as in the Notts v Yorkshire match above meritioned from a neutral county, their deciskr n should 1 ■Spo r rttogLife a “ d